be OP at damage against certain foes or behind a few other choices, be preaty bad at support but at least you can, be good but not best at npc interaction all together Profit
@@goreobsessed2308 Not really, no. The only foes he would get behind by a considerable margin is those either resistant or immune to radiant damage and those are very few and far between (not to mention usually things paladins wouldn't fight), everything else he should be able to keep ahead of the other classes (minus multiclass shenanigans or getting magic items, which in 5e are never a guarantee) in damage without much problem really as the class that gets to surpass it if the fighting day gets long enough is the fighter starting at lvl 11 and even then it takes quite a bit considering Improved Divine Smite is there. Although i will admit, he has a huge lack of ranged options, but that doesn't really make his damage not OP as that problem also happens with pretty much any class that isn't focused on it or characters that are built for the melee like every paladin is. He can buff the defense, he can buff the offense, he can heal, divine aura is a huge boost to the party STs AND he is a powerful enough damage dealer that can burst stuff down and tip the action economy scale, so he can actually draw aggro and tank since if he gets ignored there is a good chance he can wipe the enemies faster than they can wipe the other squishy party member, especially considering how dying and healing interact in this edition... pretty strong support overall. The only thing he lacks a bit is out of combat support, but being a martial class that is to be expected and desired... he still gets a lot more than the other martials though, while also being ahead of them in combat for the majority of time so he is OP in this front too. Not being the best at interacting with NPCs is subjective, as not only the skills can be used to do it and this usually is more up to the player skill than the character itself. That being said, even if he isn't the best overall, he is still way ahead of the other martial classes outside of maybe the ranger when it comes to the class giving you tools to do so and in that regard it makes him indeed "OP".
@@rafaelcastor2089 never played 5th paladin so no idea on that their alright in 3rd and it's relatives I prefer going ranged with em though to many intelligent flying monsters raining spells on me
@@goreobsessed2308 Eh... fair enough. The video was about palies in general and i didn't explicitly said i was talking about 5e either, so i brought this on myself
One of the Best Paladin character is Captain Jean Luc Picard. He is always calm and collected He has always a weighed and measured response He is always the voice of reason He is brave yet not foolish
Except (in terms of the classic lg paladin) he's clearly Lawful Neutral with good leanings. Jean Luc was to hard on following the prime directive he'd land in LN. Great character, great build for newer "don't' have to be LG" types but yeah in classic terms not a paladin.
@@ParanormalEncyclopedia However he breaks the Prime Directive on occasions it would suit him and follows the Prime Directive in situations where it was nothing but detrimental.
Paladins in 5e get their powers from their oath not their god. It is a very important distinction that allows them to be a knight errant more than a templar.
YES. THIS. I love this, because the oaths are not linked to a god. My favorite paladin ever was a Redemption Paladin who wasn't divinely powered by choice or offer. He had literally force of willed himself these powers. It was amazing. The cleric: "Wait, that was a heal spell." Paladin: "Was it?" C: "Yah, I didn't know a god powered you." P: "Uh, no? I worship no god, only want to find revenge for my family." C: "What, how." P: "MY SHEER FORCE OF WILL HAS MADE ME DIVINE!"
It is not the oath of a paladin, that gives then their power, it is their devotion to a goal, as they only speek out their oath once he is sure what they are Willing to devote themselves to (at level 3 they make their oath, hopefully of devotion)
I had a campaign where I played a LG paladin and my friend played a CN rogue. My paladin was very sheltered and naive and the rogue was constantly persuading him that the stuff he has does isn't bad and it has hilarious.
(+Chazzle) Intelligent rogue convincing a dumb paladin to do what the rogue wants them to do is one of my favorite dynamics. I had a character who figured out that if they convinced the paladin that something else was the greater evil (5e Oath of Vengeance), then the paladin would do basically whatever they wanted. My rogue exploited the blind lawfulness of the paladin and their oath.
I wish to input my own 2 cents on the concept of the Paladin. You put a very heavy emphasis on Paladins serving the will of the Gods. Though I cannot deny that is "the Paladin thing", to say that alone is a narrowed way of viewing the class concept. Paladins fall into one of either two categories: Crusaders or Templars. What you've been speaking heavily of are the Crusaders. The ones that carry the teachings of their god(s) in the attempt to repel the forces of evil and corruption and bring about the good in as much as possible. Crusaders are, arguably, the more Cleric-orientated aspect where the abilities a Paladin receives come directly from Divine intervention. Templars, however, are more inclined to follow their Paladin *Order* . They are the ones who, under the guidance of a higher power or teaching, have sworn eternal brotherhood to each other. They are the ones who are more down-to-earth about their position and more geared towards communal aspects of life, rather than the Divine. Do not get me wrong, they still serve a higher power, but that higher power could be the Paladin Order itself, rather than a god or goddess. I would say they're the more Fighter-inclined half of the class than the Crusaders. Their power comes from the will of the Order, the martial training of their Order, the optional birthright into the Order, the *community* of the Order. That is how I've come to understand Paladins after a few years of playing and watching several. It annoys me greatly when the guidlines of a Paladin are strictly "Thou shall not lie, Though shall not take more than given, etc." You can play so many more types Paladins if you can just understand that while one Paladin may serve the Goddess of the Courts, another one would be a member of the Order of Secrets.
I like the Templar Paladins more, as well. Currently I'm running a campaign where I didn't wanna bother with deities, so divine power is reskinned as a form of magic where they draw power from embodying their ideals/oath/creed (non-religious version). For example, a cleric might truly believe in helping and healing others, and travels the land and braves the dangers in order to do it, or a paladin might adhere to the Way of the Warrior. I think that's more interesting and more flexible than gods.
Definitely! I actually like that take on integrating divine aspects directly from the magic system. I'll have to bring that up to my group. Since there are no "commandments" when it comes to magic, it'll be much more fun to create different Paladin personalities without being mind slaves to their supposed one truth.
I apologize for the late response. I didn't get the notification to this. I agree Paladins receive their divine powers from some higher source. They do not study for it, it's not by bloodline, it's not archaic nor arcane. There needs to be some similar guidelines to the Clerics since Paladins are a mix between them and the Fighters. And depending on the GM, it would make sense gods are the only divine beings that can grant a Paladin their powers. But take a look at Druids. They can opt to be servants to nature gods, but it's generally more acceptable if players just want to be the allies of nature, pure and simple. No god required. They draw their powers from their druidic circle and the very energy of life itself. They have sworn to become one with nature and never abuse it. They can make a pact with creatures of the natural world, command the very natural elements of magic, change their form to - literally - be one with their domain, etc. Take those aspects and think about using those as a template for the source of the Paladin's powers. Obviously, they need to serve some metaphysical idea whose purpose is to establish unwavering faith. Something that would drive the Paladin to fight the forces of anarchy and/or evil. Since they're also referred to as Holy Knights, incorporating their Order would also be a near necessity. As I see it (and believe me, I know I do not speak for anyone but myself), the Paladin Order would be as good a substitute as a god. Generations upon generations of faith, hierarchy status, and relentless studies of said faith- I believe it sounds near identical to a Cleric's source of power when you take away the names. That is why I refer to it as 'Higher Power'. A concept that empowers the faith and mind of sentient beings to perform extraordinary feats by sheer will and belief. Gods are the common 'Higher Power' and easiest to understand. But to a native American back in the 1400's (using them because I live in the USA), their 'Paladins' wouldn't be followers of gods like Pelor or such. They would be the champions of individual spirits that made up their homes. Champion of the Buffalos, of the Rain Spirit, of the River Tribe, of the Desert Land... You see what I'm getting at here, right? What I mean to say is if you want to flavor your games to reflect, say, Native American culture, would you ban Paladin classes because your game wouldn't incorporate gods like the game provides? You have every right to. It's up to whoever's running the show to interpret the rules. But there is potential to read the fine print and expand to greater heights.
jeeshwa123 I completely agree, I don't agree with this whole "Power comes from the Oath" idea that most people have. I believe they draw power from a higher being, their Oath is a vow to that being to grant them that power to fulfill it
I thought also of the Blues Brothers. They were on a mission from God. Shameless self promotion: My raggedy channel. ruclips.net/channel/UC_a1V5vakvPI3EvcCaMfvgQ?
@@DusBeforeDawn2008 the more recent versions have Raph at the most 'powerful' fighter but Leo is the most skilled and disciplined. if the fight needs strategy and tactics, Leo is your man. if it's a straight brawl, Raph is your go to. Donis more in Leo's vein of skilled but weaker, and Mike has just been chaos incarnate. not really strong but unpredictable enough to be an annoyance.
Except the fact that Leonardo was the best fighter. Don was the smartest, Mike was the goofball, raph was the hotheaded plot device (in a bad way) but Leonardo was the leader, best fighter, Splinters #1 turtle. None of them were LG, but I guess Leo would've been the closest.
Nice, I'm currently playing a goblin paladin xD. Several months ago we have cleared out a camp of goblin scouts and took one hostage. Some time later, after travelling with us, the goblin became more civilized and we left him at a church, where he sworn to help the monks (doing some busy work - cleaning stuff etc, since we didn't really want to carry him around a lot). And 2 sessions later - my barbarin rolled a one, while throwing my teammates over some giant hole in a dungeon. So when throwing the last guy and getting a one - he immediately sheated his waraxe, hit it against the wall, allowing a small gap of time for the last party member to get to safety and slipped down into the abyss. So the wery next session, when the party came out of the dungeon - a familliar face in full-plate armor greeted them xD.
The Paladin has always been my favorite class. This is the Arthurian knight who has sworn to protect the innocent, the missionary who leads by example and gentle persuasion. The real problem in 2nd Edition was the requirement of Charisma to be 17 or higher, which always used a stat roll that could otherwise be put into Strength or Dexterity.
I once had a lot of fun playing an insane paladin who believed himself to be a god who had been banished from the heavens and deamed unworthy. He was a peaceful man who considered violence a last resort, seeking to encourage others by example. Ironically the party fighter actually became a worshipper of this paladin (although this was somewhat undermined by the fact that this same fighter believed axes were a sentient lifeform and often had conversations with them). Hilariously, at one point my paladin prayed to himself for divine intervention and he got it! We looked up the 1st edition chanecs of divine intervention, performed all the necessary calculations and it worked out at 4%. I picked up those two ten siders and rolled 02. A genuine miracle occurred because this virtuous knight believed himself to be a god! It ended up placing him in more danger but it bought the rest of the party time to ascend the 200ft verticle shaft to face the villain who would have been able to put a very nasty plan into action if the paladin had not miraculously gained all the equipment he had left behind in town (it was a city adventure so he'd gone without arms and armour so as not to cause discomfort to the locals) and levitated up the vertical shaft to face the foe. Sometimes miracles do happen :).
One of my favorite little bits of Paladin-dom is from Pathfinder. A Paladin archetype called the Vindictive Bastard. It's for the Paladin who falls from grace, and then looks up to the heavens and says, "Nyuh-uh!" They're fallen, and get a lesser form of some of their abilities back, fueled by their stubborn refusal to ever admit they were wrong. But best of all, at 17th level, when others would get the Aura of Righteousness ability, the Vindictive Bastard instead gets the Aura of Self-Righteousness. Such a silly thing.
The idea of the paladin in the old days was you are super powerful because you are going to role play yourself to death. People who wanted the power without the price (I’m looking at you munchkins) have been a bane of the class. The other major problem has been people who wanted to be selfish asses, a paladin could always travel with chaotic party members, they were only ever barred from traveling with EVIL. The paladin is a manifestation of the gains of principle and sacrifice. To balance moving from this ideal we have seen the paladin depowered to justify the less restricted version of the class. Then another problem of people who lack the imagination to see a paladin as anything other than “my disapproving father”.
we actually had a paladin of Iomedae and a lawful evil sorcerer who worshipped Asmodeus together in a party in our Wrath of the Righteous campaign (Pathfinder), who worked very well together basically for the forces of law against chaotic evil demons. The premise was that the paladin had always hopes to eventually redeem the sorcerer from her evil ways, because although she worshipped and conjured devils, she was very cooperative and helpful and even put party needs before her own in some cases and they agreed on certain bases for example to not take slaves in their combats, to grant every criminal a trial, set down a codex of law that they could agree on and just had to work things ot beforehand so they could operate together... and they did. It was time-consuming, it wasn't easy, but they eventually worked it out and they were really effective as a team. Most people that state 'a paladin must absolutely not travel with evil people' forget that the alignment system is not rigid. There is redemption, there is fall from grace and Paladins are usually not only about punishment, but also about redemption and converting people to their faiths. And if they think they have to walk the long walk for someone that they feel can see the light one day, then why should they just cast them away instead of trying everything in their might to better them?
@@wanderdragon1075 it was, but we finished the campaign like 3 or 4 years ago. Said sorceress became a vampire somewhere down the road, but it didn't really affect her gameplay since she had been LE anyway, so she was mostly cranky, that she couldn't eat all her favourite foods anymore. She still worked with the party towards the greater goal and in hopes to being able to True Resurrect her one day the paladin even started to court her. Sadly it didn't work out in the end since she grew way too fond of her new undead powers and the Paladin begrudgingly gave up on her as that became too obvious. He's Level 20 and single now, sitting in the High Council of Drezen and she went on to explore different parts of the world and acquired a taste for the blood of adolescent boys... ehm... yes. At least it worked until the campaign goal was achieved...
The medieval paladin however was much more amusing... he ran around shouting that everyone is possessed by the devil and to worship a specific god and to follow them and... we that’s how the crusades began.
Currently having fun playing a paladin of Sarenrae who has a rather low intelligence score. A score of 7, to be exact. So I'm playing her as a bit of a ditz who is nevertheless kind to everyone. She considers the code she lives by to be a code for herself alone and understands that other people do good in different ways. She may just ask endless questions because she's curious about their views and might be a bit too stupid to understand them when they speak in abstract terms, but she ultimately means well and hopes to be an inspiration to others in time.
Paladin: Being a paladin is always great! You're popular for your tanking and healing skills. Everyone loves your company! you're too perfect but, who cares, you'll never be bored.
clericofchaos1 That's true in 5e at least, but in previous editions they are extremely hated and specifically in 3rd edition they are considered the weakest class and were severally dependent on multiple stats which meant they became very underwhelming of a class. Honestly, I can't even come anywhere near 3rd edition anymore because 5e fixed Paladins so much that they are one of the best classes in the game.
There's another kind of Paladin I think, but it only works in a specific story - the Humble Hero. The one who worked hard to become a paladin but not to go on crusades or anything, but to protect their home. Maybe they suffered some traumatic experience when they were young and now want to make sure that doesn't happen to anyone else again. They don't intend to go off on some epic quest but events may conspire to draw them in anyway. I say it only works in a specific story because of that last bit. I made a paladin like this for a Pathfinder campaign going through the *Wrath of the Righteous* Adventure Path where the very premise of the campaign would force them to be part of the adventure and, ultimately, it would be for the same reason they became a paladin; to protect their home (or what's left of it after the campaign's opening - anyone who's read the blurb for Part 1 should know what I mean).
I would like to say something regarding Paladins as it was, and still is rather, the chosen class for my very first DnD character. I was not even very sure of what a Paladin was at the time (insert Spoony paladin meme here), but I knew they were kind of party poopers, or at least were considered as such by most players. What I did to avoid this issue, was to make it a person who believes people can change, and sees the goodness in them. This way when I had to lecture, my teammates often felt encouraged by my words instead of being pissed by being yelled at. But I did something else. Something accidental which turned out for the better. In my disregard for the stat, I completely ignored Wisdom. This made me unable to perceive or insight people in any good fashion, hell I didn't even have proficiency in either of those stats. So suddenly, my paladin was finding herself defending the party, and claiming how such honorable warriors and upstanding members of society could possibly never break into a secluded and restricted section of the library and stolen a sensitive piece of information regarding a long forgotten dungeon for themselves. All the while the other players were bursting in laughter because they totally fucking stole it. :p
Although I'm younger I've been playing dnd and dming for 4 years now. Just discovered your channel earlier this week. Love these videos and I've been learning a lot. Thank you so much for such a great resource.
The most fun I had with a paladin; Ordred, my Arthurian paladin (heavily influenced by Tristram) Sworn to the Lady Margrev Fought, Drank, Fornicated, Suffered, Volunteered 2days a week at the “Healers off the Square”when in town.
One of my favorite paladin narrative lines from the kits in AD&D 2, paladin handbook is the idea of the Expatriate: where the institution granting paladin-hood has become corrupted yet the individual (perhaps a small sect) remains true to the deity itself - thus remaining "lawful and good" to their deity yet "unlawful and evil" to their former institution... and whatnot...
I played a paladin type who was raised by a hermit. Most of the time he ran around in leather armor with a staff, leading a donkey who was his pack animal. This guy would fight, using his powers sparingly, but mainly acted as a counsellor for the other characters. He saw great potential for good in them and so was subtly trying to steer them in the right directions. His whole crusade was a spiritual one, to find companions that he could help become better people than what they were at the start.
A personal favorite approach to doing a Paladin is to actually lean into the cliches of the bad Paladin. To make a deconstructive lampoon of the Lawful Good mr-do-no-wrong. To me, the absolute best race for Paladin is Warforged. The idea would be that a church raises a child, thought to be a chosen messiah, to adhere to the ideals of the Paladin. Depending on the milage for adult themes in the game, this can anything from simple pressure to perform to outright abuse, but regardless, the child grows up with this twisted ideal of perfection that no human is able to live up to. So, the child binds his/her soul to the body of a machine, abandoning his/her worldly needs and begins losing more of his humanity by the day, in an attempt to become the perfect vessel for his god's will, the god itself reacting however DM sees fit.
The character I play is a 14 year old boy, who at 12, was pawned off by his noble family to squire for an old paladin. The paladin my character squires for (he's a PC as well) is teaching him the ways of his god, in hopes that I will replace him when he grows too old to serve his god effectively. My character sees him as role model, and something of a father figure, and during fights, focuses his healing and buffs on him more than the others in our party, though that does upset some of the other players sometimes.
I love the versatility of a Paladin in combat. In combat, I would play different roles depending on what we seemed to need at the time. Our Druid was similar in that role. My character was often the moral compass of our group. At least until we ran into a group of heretics and oathbreakers. They were a bit surprised when I murdered all of them.
1) A general tip: When I used to run campaigns I did the trick that if someone wanted to skate their alignment restrictions I would have them make a WIS check. 2) For Paladins a good restriction is to really enforce that they cannot use magic items, or be the voluntary target of spells from other players.
That TMNT reference was absolute gold. This inspires me to perhaps play a paladin for my next series on my channel, I completely forgot the Paladin Kits. An excellent foundation for a character, thank you for the ideas and inspiration for my own videos and stories, as always, Guy!
In my setting paladin are actually inquisitors and they serve all the gods, but there is no alignement gods, like the god of good or god of bad or god of magic, rather a god embody a concept with no morality, time is one, death (all must die to feed the gods), truth (as truth is in fact all that exist) and all these gods are at war with a god of pain (which again is not inherently evil). So the goal of (most of) the paladin is to prevent pain and suffering and that's interesting because if an inquisitor see someone suffering they can help them by healing them, or killing them so the god does not decide the morality of its servant.
I have drawn up a paladin just recently, a paladin who fights for redemtion. The kind of paladin who isnt proud of their past and teaches the naïve the lessons the paladin has learned over time.
I tend to see different classes as exemplars of a specific trait, concept, or mentality. Barbarians are icons of fury unbound, fighters pragmatiam, rogues the paragons of greed, rangers loyalty, wizards are exemplars of the power of the mind, sorcerers of inner potential, et cetera. The paladin, to me, is the exemplar of stalwart defiance. Where others may give in to rage and temptation, where others may lose themselves to despair, the paladin cannot - will not - give in. They _have to_ stand, even if they must do it alone, for those that can't or won't stand for themselves. Despite what weighs on them, they stand, they defy what seeks to drag them down, they are the vigilant shield.
My best paladin versus rogue type situation (bear in mind, we hardly get to play because we usually just can't get the people together) was probably after the rogue had been picking pockets. He would be stealing and did this a few times, I didn't ever roll any perception to try and catch him. He was getting more carried away with it and eventually rolled poorly and pally saved his little arse. I interject with diplomacy, picking up an old man's purse the thief had fumbled. He's confused but buys it. Then paladin tells rogue "if it happens again you're on your own". I thought about actually rolling an intimidate but the point got across. That paladin was kind of a dad role play, the more wise than overbearing type as he'd give you space, let you fuck up, bail you out, but if you still haven't learned, you can learn the hard way. And the player was pretty rude to me when we first met. Somewhat jokingly and maybe was trying to fill me out. But I don't rib back and forth trading insults with someone I've known for 5 minutes. It's awkward and if you know someone well a few years your burns will really burn. All and all the guy wasn't so bad. Talking about the rogue, not the player. ;)
Last week, Nerdarchy did a video on “10 things you miss about D&D” and feeling a little mischievous I slipped into my list “Paladins should be Lawful Good”. Sure enough, people are still arguing about it a week later in the comments section. Obviously, people should play the game however they want but I do think there is a benefit to people getting that old school experience. Try playing a Paladin at least once as the Sir Gawain or Captain America. Be the hero. It makes for a great character and a fantastic role play experience. Just don’t go overboard and play the character as “Lawful Stupid”.
I kinda miss the Lawful Good Paladin, I also think people forget that it's Lawful and Good, and sometimes the best parts are when whats good and what they can do lawfully (either law wise or code wise) differ, that can create a fantastic story in and of it's self.
I play a fall from grace type paladin. He used to be a rich noble that took the oath but never followed any of the tenants and very much a peacock tried kill evil things just for show. But then, one time met a Deva disguised as a hag, got zapped, and was turned into a kobold, stripping him of his luxuries. Up until he met the party, he was living in a kobold den and was found hiding in a corner. So he must pray everyday for forgiveness, genuinely tries, but is really clumsy and bad at it. And every time he screws up, he goes off and and prays for forgiveness again. Also a huge coward, since he's a kobold. Also rolled an intelligence of five
One of my characters that I never used is a (Oath of the crown) knight who's oath is basically loyalty vows. He wants to save his misstress from slavery, he's a normal Knight, but with powers from his oath.
Dancan799 I am considering a Centaur paladin myself for an upcoming campaign. probably oath of ancients. did your PC wear heavy armor or something else?
I built an Oath of Ancients centaur Paladin, Vidarin the Vengeful. He'd sacrifice his life to save a dying animal, but smite someone for repeated littering. Lol
The Paladin has always been my favorite. Not just in D&D but just about anything with Paladins. Cecil Harvey, Agrias Oaks and Beatrix in Final Fantasy, for instance. My Bhaalspawn is a Paladin. My favorite iteration has to be Pathfinder's version of the paladin though.
The character I’m working on now is a redemption paladin with the fighting style of fisticuffs. He swore off using a “weapon” due to a training accident where his fellow student used a sword of vengeance in a sparring match.
For me while the need to be the "lawful good" has been removed from many modern versions of games. I still find that the need to live by a restricting code they should still be required to be lawful, since following a code is practically the definition of lawful.
my view on paladins is usually that they are the devout unbreakable warrior and lays all their trust with their deity that their deity will bail them out or make them invincible in the greatest face of danger or their cause is justified. but i also like the aspect of religion for lots of different reasons, like having religion as a scapegoat or their safety blanket or where they get their sense of honor or their behaviour in context with different laws that are contradictory. or the most fun when they are intrinsically in contradiction to their own faith but they don't mean to be so they seek redemption often for their misdeeds, kind of like being catholic, being branded a sinner from birth and seeking forgiveness from their deity to ease their conciousness. an in-game example would be if you were swayed by your party to do something out of your deitys will like stealing, you would need to make amends by doing something good or in accordance with that deitys will or simply pay for absolution in some shape or form. my simplest view on a paladin is that they are soldiers that just adheres to a deity, a deity that often preaches no violence. which can be rather conflicting to the soldier since soldiers are trained killers, making paladins a very unique contrasting character in itself another way of looking at it would be to look at the warlock who makes a pact with a demon, though that person might still be inclined to do good but are swayed to do evil things because of the demon. and similarly is the paladin in a semblance of a pact with something like an angel like figure but they have a human nature to sometimes do bad but are swayed to do good because of their angel. it's not allways about blood offerings and sacrifices and it's not allways about crusades and punishing the wicked. sometimes it's just how that character tries to get by in the current world they are in.
maybe i missed it but i like to play the humble paladin. One who act's in the will of his god, but is not zealous and more forgiving in the shortcomings of others. this in turn can make him susceptible to deception by others and often leads in the direction of the nearly failed paladin
Great subject and great video... I used to have such trouble dealing with Players who couldn't get past the stereotype of Paladin... This was also back in 2e (and earlier...lolz) and there really wasn't a lot to do. I had enough on my shoulders with just making Players and GM's alike read the alignment sections out loud before letting the game go on, because of the lack of literacy. Lawful Good is NOT lawful stupid. Likewise, Chaotic Evil does NOT mean absolutely and insufferably brain damaged. I hate that... SO for the Paladin... Somewhere, it was written that the origin of the Paladin was under the Goddess, Paladine... Palatine(?) Whatever... In any case, having read that, either in a supplement for D&D or in some RPG magazine, I dropped the term Paladin entirely from the system... AND I reskinned the thing a "Holy Knight"... Simple. You no longer absolutely HAD to be Human, nor Lawful nor Good... The powers would be roughly equivalent, and exemplar of your Deity of choice... No need to screw with progression and XP/Level (F*** math)... AND Players were suddenly free to play ANY screwy type of Paladin-esque character they like... They could be as argumentative and sacrilegious as they liked OR they could be as easy going and generally motivated as they wanted or preferred... SO I would cautiously suggest that in the case there's difficulty understanding just how dynamic the Role can be, you GM's out there shouldn't be afraid to monkey with the mechanics to bring your Players closer to the things they'll enjoy playing without being so hard on the rest of the party... Never EVER let the rules get in the way of the game. :o)
gnarth d'arkanen I personally believe the only thing a paladin has to be is lawful, and that is because of their vow to their chosen god. Which makes the vow and the god very important. Because that vow and that God decides what things you can accept and what things you can't accept. A lawful evil paladin might be okay with theft so long as they don't get caught because of the creed of their god. So on and so forth. Of course this requires people to research these things before making their paladin.
Okay, Jacob Freeman... First, let me make a couple (relatively small) points as clear as I can... AND number 1... How YOU prefer to run your games is entirely YOUR craft... and that's perfectly okay, too. When I get the chance and join your table, YOU are GM, and I am Player... Simple as that. Just like I intro' myself as "I don't play God, I even tell Him what to do... so don't insult me." I expect YOU as GM to carry the same "weight"... SO while I will advocate (to my best) my Character in concept and all functions there-in, YOU still hold final say. It is (after all) YOUR craft... at that time. Second, along with the rule "Never EVER let the rules get in the way of the game." I carry a sort of caveat, "Narrative is EVERYTHING." With adequate Narrative, a GM builds his own license to TAKE agency... similarly, with adequate Narrative (descriptive helps, too) a Player can build his own license (of course subject to the GM and Party's permissions) for agency. Now, that said, I will agree that your idealism around Paladins (or Holy Knights) holds some credibility. Just as Lawful indicates a structured character that holds to some code of conduct, so also Chaotic indicates some opposition to that in favor of individualism. However, (advocation of my concept, here} even the fiercest individualist is capable of making a promise or taking a vow and holding onto it. It's probably NOT going to be some ridiculously regimental thing to structure out his whole lifestyle. Let's face it. Individualists are so labelled for reasons and have their limits. BUT for the sake of a believable fantasy-surrealistic world setting, I believe it should be allowed. Plenty of people (IRL) have taken classical vows (and held them) while obviously fitting their surroundings about as well as square pegs and round holes. The Christian faith alone has a fair litany of monks and even several Saints listed for their individualist natures while performing quite handily for the Church... I should suspect (if research were truly available) that Knights have had their share of "weirdo's and misfits" in the ranks. While it can present terminally disruptive behavior, a thing we GM's must work our hardest to avoid when possible, THAT is still on the Player's shoulders of responsibility. SO he might not be exactly a very successful Holy Knight (or Paladin) but his (or her) alignment shouldn't necessarily preclude him from the attempt... Take the oath, and press it for Role Play... It's a veritable font (in my experience) for creative problem solving... and near no end of hilarity. Finally, I suggest that a Chaotic Deity might well align with a Chaotic Holy Knight (or Paladin) to a degree that something or other of penance be pronounced for "indiscretions" and even draw that Knight all the closer to the deity, simply because their personalities "mesh" so well... even if at first blush it looks like a recipe for a horrific failure... In any case, you're certainly free to lay the laws as you see fit. This thread is simply a (hopefully) mindful exercise in concept, meant to give you pause for thought and debate... Thus my original purpose of eliminating the term "Paladin" and replacing it with "Holy Knight" (or "Unholy Knight" as might better fit) for the class... at least the way I usually run at my table... ;o)
gnarth d'arkanen I just wanted to solve the fun killer aspect without making big changes. If the lawfulness of a paladin is a reflection of the vow they took to their god...then would they have to care about anything not covered by their god and vow? It is their god's outlook they are trying to enforce, after all. That the god in question may be chaotic is besides the point. The paladin will rigorously espouse and defend the tenets of their god as proclaimed in their vow all the same ;)
Jacob Freeman, I'd warn against confusing a "Preacher" with a "Knight" or a "Monk"... The Preacher, does the preaching... It's his vow and personal duty... AND that's why he's called the Preacher... The Monk, may espouse all he likes, but many even take a vow of silence... SO... they do their other "brotherly tasks" as such, and narry a word spoken about their god's affluent or influential nature about anything... They copy the scriptures, log and upkeep the teachings (often even outside religious), and maintain the monastery... The Knight, DEFENDS the following. That's it. If he wins, it's because his god is right and strong. If he fails/loses, it's because either his god is weak or wrong, OR because he has failed his god. That's really all the more tenet you need worry about as far as a vow toward knighthood. Now, as you pointed out, the alignment of a god really has no bearing. At the same time, the Lawfulness of a Holy Knight should also be considered only a facet of the class, not exactly a requirement. It doesn't particularly have bearing on the why or how that knight was put into position to become a knight either... He's sworn to protect the god's following at status quo, and to spread that following (in military manner) in outward progresses... BUT he is NOT sworn (necessarily) to wander village to village and preach. It would be a waste of his strengths as a protector and military professional, just like a knight for a king or emperor... Now, some deities may certainly require the whole of regimental stylings. If that's your fancy, and your Players don't feel infringed in their freedoms, it's fine. BUT not all military soldiers are particularly regimental or structured, either. SO I'd hazard that we easily slip into the "rut" of stereotyping and romanticizing the Templar Brotherhood on which the original Paladin kit was based... So think of some of the wilder possibilities if deities are "for real" in the world. Practically every time I've introduced a Chaotic Holy Knight, there's been some resource for humorous banter between the knight and his (or her) deity, to say the least. It's hardly a fun killer. Half the times, we got into such creative arguments that the whole table joined in... Some defending the knight and others siding with the god... We even had to take breaks just to get our notes straight on what to argue next... BUT that's us. AND YOU know your table a WHOLE LOT better than I. I'd simply suggest the next time you have a PC-concept of a Holy Knight with a Chaotiic bent to him, you mull it over a bit, rather than shoot it straight down as "stupid". Remember, "Narrative is EVERYTHING" and maybe, even if that Player needs a little help with convincing story, you can see where he wants to go with it. It might not be so bad an idea. ;o)
I believe that is referring to the God Paladine from the Dragon Lance setting, who was basically the leader of the good-aligned Gods and of course LG, who had like an entire knighthood dedicated to him.
Great video, paladins have always been my favorite! The first time it was describe to me, when i was 12, as "A righteous knight of justice" I was hooked!
Thank you for making this video. It was quite informative. I myself am currently running a lawful good paladin in 5th edition D&D. My paladin worships Kira (taken straight from the Death Note anime/manga), so has no problem delivering the guilty to the proper authorities, but at other times, if is out in the wilderness and no proper authorities are available or is killing monsters, has no problem delivering justice at the point of his sword either. And he donates his loot to open orphanages.
The idea of the helpless hero inspires me a bit, it creates possibilities for fantastic backstory. The one that's popped into my head is the idea of a guy, maybe a knight, who as you said does right by nature, purely by their own will. One day they might do a deed particularly selfless or in line with a certain God's beliefs, and the good may present themself, and give the Paladin his powers, starting the quest from level 1. My only fear is creating a Mary Sue, but that just takes some more thought. Maybe they might struggle with tunnel vision, who knows.
This is the best paladin video I've seen on the class and concept. Thanks for being straight forward, respecting my time, and covering a lot of ideas quickly.
I ran a DnD 5e Oath of Conquest paladin who got murdered in an alley (for snubbing a local lordling) and received a second chance at life from a valkyrie, IF he went about smiting and ass kicking the 'bullies' of the world so that the valkyrie could take some cool stories back to valhalla. much much fun. also, the valkyrie was an active npc. She loved to chat with the paladin without revealing her presence to anyone in the room so, for about 8 sessions, everyone thought my guy was completely delusional. food for thought.
I am so glad I caught this video. I am about to start a new champaign, with a new group and I'm playing a Paladin Wood Elf. I normally play it as a "Captain America" type. In watching this video, it got me thinking... If I fell from grace, why? How about a former Elf General, who years ago sacrificed themselves to a pact with a God (think Warlock) in order to save his Army from certain doom. It's part redemption (even though it was the most selfless act) and a bit bitter for being locked into the arrangement with a deity that may not have been his own. The loss of free will, I think is the interesting part to play with here, especially for someone who gave up everything in order to save others. I'm sort of thinking "reverse Spawn" or "reverse Ghostrider" man... I am kinda pumped about it now.
One of my favourite characters I've ever made was a paladin who fell from grace making a warlock pact, before actually taking an oath at 3rd level (5e d&d) and my DM agreed I could keep those two levels of abilities but not advance to level 3 unless they atoned to the values of their old order or found a new oath to take. The party was mostly sympathetic and tried to gently convince my character to come to terms with the situation and move forward, and some of the moments that came out of that were my favourites in any game I've played. Unfortunately the DM had a complete lack of restraint or control when it came to the plot, which combined with some out of game issues with the group led to the campaign collapsing. The character was so enjoyable that I've been waiting for a chance to rework some of it into a new campaign with a new group, or at least to play a paladin again.
Yet another epic video pali is my go to class and have played a fair few (5e only) Best Pali I played that piped back up being used by other GMs as a city founder and great hero and so on All from his final use by me He had just had an arm blown off trying to close a hell gate as a siege beast burst out The party desired to flee... He could not he was determined to save the party to the point he through party members through a demention door that had been opened by the wizard so they could flee Ended up being one on one with the beast before the wizard teleported in to get him out At this point he was failing away from his wounds But it was very nice hearing him pop up as the other GMs loved the roll and the character so much :-)
Paladin is my favorite class, I absolutely love everything about them from their design and their themes. The only thing I hate is that they have such a stigma against them due to the whole "Purge the heretics and kill all who thinks otherwise from me and my god" stereotype.
My first ever character is a LG blue dragonborn paladin, but the way I got around the LG alignment was that he was a man of the people. While he did follow the law he believed it was put in place as a guide line to keep peace, this it was justifiable to break the law of it was for the betterment of the public. He also was a knight so he could get the party out of legal trouble. My favorite thing about him is the retainers he has. He has the young dragonborn that are his retainers that he would teach them how to live normal lives and become knights.
I’m working on a backup character Paladin that was forced to be humble because the kingdom he served fell to evil, and he got his ass kicked so badly trying to fight them that he basically lost use of most of the right side of his body. So he’s fine working with chaotic rogues because he’s broken and willing to do anything to maintain what he has left of his honor. He’s based off of Artorias the Abysswalker.
I didn't have a good experience playing as a paladin. This is very game-specific and a personal problem on my part, but I constantly found myself in situations where i either kept repeating what I was doing every turn or just not doing much. There was a cap on the smiting the DM enforced, which really nerfed how my character was, and I slowly found myself becoming very bored playing as a character that, compared to my other characters, didn't have enough oomph roleplay-wise or combat-wise. In that same campaign, there was an "alternates" night where, you guessed it, we got to play different characters. So i made my alternate a phoenix sorcerer because the DM allowed Unearthed Arcana and because I wanted to try out being a sorcerer. I had so much more fun playing as this character that I never wanted to touch the paladin again. Even now I just find it would be better to be a cleric for some of the holier aspects or warlock for the smiting aspects. I might play a paladin again to get more experience playing as one, but I'm afraid of running into the same mechanical trap as I had.
Well Paladin is one of my favorite classes, and was the first class I ever played in Dungeons & Dragons. Honestly, I don't care about alignment at all, and I'm not a goody-two-shoes. I'm usually Chaotic Neutral, and serve gods of death lmao. I just play however I feel like playing, and I have fun. I don't restrict myself based on alignment.
This video gave me an interesting idea for a paladin character. Thank you! Because sharing is caring: I think of someone who lived a normal life but suddenly his village got attacked. At this attack some of the villagers got murdered and the aggressors kidnapped all children. He tried and his wife tried to stop them. As they tried, his wife lost her life and he also was wounded so bad that he was about to die. Right before he would die, a god speaks to him, because his wish to save his child is that strong. The god rescues him and give him devine powers to get back his child and take down these evil guys. Maybe these evil guys are under control of an evil god or something like that. I think there is a lot of potential for the character to develop and having an character mission that is interesting to the whole party.
My inspiration for my paladin character was slightly inspired by Saint Seraphim of Sarov, with some help from my DM. His backstory was typical of a paladin; A child who grew up on a farm and in his teen was recruited to a monastery where he was trained as a paladin and took his vows to his god. The elder of the monastery was growing old and had nightmares of dark forces coming to the continent, so he was sent to investigate. There he met the party that was on this quest, which was fitting because their mission was related to the nightmares of the elder. The plot twist came much later when we were tricked by a witch and my character was turned into a toddler. During his curse he broke his vows, because toddlers are too impulsive, and his punishment was that after his mission he would be sent to exile. This exile took place when we had a side campaign where I was DM'ing. During my exile I lived off the forest, and started using the forest as his place of worship. He kept the words of his god, prayed daily, and eventually grew fond of the nature around him. Eventually he was too tired of the tiresome monastery life that he started living for some time as a forest hermit, praying and chilling with the animals around. When I was done dm'ing my exile was over and I chose to return to my party. And that is how I multiclassed into a paladin/druid, who used nature as his medium of worship and service.
So my friends and I are running a home brewed D&D campaign. I play a paladin who is not lawful good. He's actually neutral good. Or he's supposed to be... but I've killed nuns, children, old ladies, and shopkeeps. Recently I accidentally set loose a bunch of Drakes on a small village. So, I looked at my character sheet and my alignment had changed. I asked dm and she said " You're not f*cking neutral good, you beheaded an old lady." My paladin is now listed as Chaotic Evil.
I think my favorite example of a Paladin falls under the category of the "last of their kind" type, and that is Sturm Brightblade from the Dragonlance Chronicles. He was clearly a Paladin, and he spent the entire "campaign" as the moral compass of the party, but without being at all overbearing. He would do what the party decided to do, sometimes reluctantly, but he was always keeping them aligned to be a force of righteousness in the world. It saddens me when Paladins are your typical hurrdurr kinda Paladin.
In my experience, at least with the traditional not-black paladins, one advantage to paladins is that you can almost always count on them to be honest or genuine party members in any situation.
In my current campaign I started out with an Inquisitor character. For anyone who hasn't played them before, Inquisitors are like Paladin's but are usually on the more extreme side of things. They abide by the law of their God and seek to root out those who are against their religion. So the way I played it was he was a lawful good character who tried to treat everyone fairly and keep balance. However, there were certain acts and people that his religion found to be considered heresy. Those who fell into heresy were considered less than human and subject to death.
I played a character that started as one class, and evil. And through the campaign they had drifted from being lawful evil, to being lawful good, instead of using the law for her own goals, she used the law to protect the innocent, she did so through having religious experiences and becoming a paladin in service to a god. A bit more detail about it is that I was playing a fighter, who was going for the leader archetype, starting as a city guard with the party being "deputies" under my watch as we investigated a farm that had been cursed, finding the family dead and raised as undead. From there is lead to us discovering a necromancer (whom we also learned was the leader of the town, known as the Governor (though was not elected) but not just that, but that a rakshasa had killed him, taken his place as governor, and the real governor made a pact with Nerull so that he could seek revenge on the rakshasa and the town, in exchange for helping nerull with his plans as well. This is when my character started to really come into a leadership role, beyond just the party as I had begun amassing townsfolk to form a militia, to combat the necromancer who was gaining support as well from a lizarfolk encampment in the swamp. At first my character wanted to peacefully negotiate with the lizardfolk, get them to work for us instead of the necromancer. Negotiations did not go as planned. Though they went well enough that we were able to leave without a fight, but that's where we sent another character's eagle to deliver a message back to town to advance the militia, then we made plans to siege the camp. The fight went spectacularly with our side taking zero causalities. We captured a few of their soldiers, a leader or two got away or killed themselves, and during the fight we discovered that they were using necromancy to raise undead alligators as well as working on other abominations. All this lead to us finding the location of the necromancer's tower, on a island in the middle of a large lake. We set out to the tower without the militia, but the church had appointed a paladin to help deal with the necromancer with us (an NPC.) When we got to the island we were immediately attacked back a dozen skeletal archers and a giant skeleton. We won the fight but at the cost of two PCs, our rogue, and my character, but the Paladin said that he could use his divine magic to bring *one* of us back, only one, not both. Though he also said that it would be at the cost of his own life as well, but that he had already made up his mind that he was going to do it. And the decision on who came to our Cleric, who she decided that she would pray to her god, Pelor. I to this day do not know what her god told her, but she just said that she heard a voice speak to her and she knew it was Pelor. She never told us what he actually said, but she requested my character to be ressurected, even though at the time my character was lawful evil (keeping her evil acts mostly a secret, as well as keeping her desire to use the fact that the current governor is an imposter and the support of the militia she had formed to place herself as a warlord of the town, imposing strict laws and such.) Even the DM was surprised by her decision, because she partially decided on my character because my character was the so-called tank at the time, absorbed most of the damage while also giving buffs to my teammates to help them in the fight. We got through the castle, but without killing the necromancer, (and I got a lucky roll on loot, loot that the DM didn't even really plan on anyone trying to loot. Long story short, we defeated a colossal blood hulk by getting an even bigger boulder to roll over and crush him, using a coin to get their attention and stay in one place as the thing rolled over them, then I said, "I want my silver coin back, I will dig through the blood and veins to find it." DM told me to make a series of rolls for loot as well, ended up getting a +5 morning star, still asked, "Did I get my coin back?". Anyway after attacking the necromancer but him escaping, there was a huge explosion and we all found ourselves unconscious waking up on the beach of the island and the tower completely gone. A boat rowed ashore with a single person in it (A young human male that I had employed at the start of the game to help me keep my weapons and armor clean and in top shape, as well as helping me don my armor since it was full plate.) He had his tongue cut out but we managed to get him to write a message, telling us that the rakshasa had made a move and ousted everyone we had told about him being an imposter but told them to keep a sealed lip about it until we had dealt with the necromancer first since it wouldn't have been wise to attack him so soon. He had killed my captain, enslaved many miners from the nearby mine, and sent many others fleeing the city before he quarantined them all in. The one's that escaped made their way to the old lizardfolk encampment that we had the foresite to establish as our own base of operations after taking it from them. The rakshasa was not aware of it's location so it was safe from them. We met up with them at this encampment and at first they did not believe us because the rakshasa had used some trickery and illusions to make the townfolk think we had publicly admitted to assisting the necromancer and that is why the tower had disappeared when we went there, and then made it seem that we had been executed for our crimes. We had to prove that it was us before they let us in. We then took an entire month training the militia, as well as making a trip to a nearby town known for it's highly skilled warriors and we got them to agree to help us in our fight to retake the town and free the people. We also freed the slaves at the nearby mine cutting our enemies from a source of good supplies, as well as giving the people hope. We then used our druid to negotiate with some giant ants to help us, convincing them that the rakshasa's greed and lust for wealth would drive them to driving the ants out of their home. They agreed to help us as well. So our plan was to tunnel our way directly to the governors mansion as well as creating diversion tunnels to undermine a few roads leading to the mansion to distract guards and to prevent them from making it to the mansion easily. While we also had a wave of militia fighters storming the front gates of the wall to put pressure on the enemy. Once again we failed to prevent our target from escaping, but we succeeded in retaking the town. We were all celebrating the victory, and planning on what we would do next because we knew our fight with the necromancer was not over, and the rakashasa could come back at anytime and shapeshift as any person. So our druid went to the druid grove in town, our cleric went to the temple, and my character ran a few errands, paying mercenaries who she had hired to join the militia, as well as diving out pay for the militia as it had essentially became their job, and she began making plans on how to fill the power vacuum with her in a position of tremendous power, but also allowed her to leave the town as she pleased and not relegated to having to stay in town to run it. In the meantime she needed to talk with the cleric and so she headed towards the temple. Upon entering it and taking a few steps towards our cleric a divine messenger appeared, casting blinding light and speaking in a booming, angry voice. Condemning me, cursing me for stepping foot in the temple, telling my character that Pelor has been outraged by the sacrifice of one of his own paladins to save her life, telling of her evil deeds, of her evil desires, casting shame upon her. And that she must repay a debt, either through devotion, sacrifice of something dear to her (the +5 morning star that she had found, which turned out to be much more later on but that's another story), or her life. And then they vanished, the priests cast my character out of the temple. Our cleric rushed out to speak with her, and offered guidance, while my character talked with them and reflected on her actions, her desires. Because in her eyes she simply desired order and safety, her ideas however we extreme, believing in a set caste system, with no ability to move up or down, allowing slavery as a means of punishment for crimes as well as punishment for not paying one's debts. She did not see these as evil desires, she saw these as a means of creating an orderly and safe society that is prosperous and strong. She saw no evil in her desires or actions. However, after being told outright that not only were her actions and desires wrong, that they had angered a deity of good by way of the act of someone else sacrificing their life to save hers, well she knew she had to reflect on her life. The next day she asked the cleric to speak with the priests of the temple, to allow my character into the temple, so that she could repent, and seek redemption, but she had one request, she said she would devote her life to good, but that she could not follow Pelor, and asked if she could devote her life to Heironeous, so that she could not only pay her debts with simple devotion, but to go out seeking evil and either bringing them redemption or retribution. Because her reflection made her feel so terrible about what she had done, and what she had planned on doing, she wanted to fight the same evils that had possessed her. The priests communicated and prayed, three days later they came back and said that the gods had agreed, but a ritual must be performed for her atonement. This is how my character became a paladin after being lawful evil. And now that campaign is over the DM is running another campaign set 300 or so years in the future of that campaign, and while I am not playing the same build, or even type of character, my new character is a descendant of my previous character.
Reached character limit in previous comment, but I wanted to mention a funny story. After my paladin character became lawful good and a paladin, she ended up making a deal with a devil, not as a means of falling back on her evil ways, but because the party had just gotten through a particularly brutal fight and had not had anytime to heal or rest, and the devil had a captive. The party wanted a fight, and they were REALLY gearing up for that fight, but I KNEW we could not win it. But I put my foot down, I demanded that they listen to reason, even if it meant making a deal with the devil, and I told them, it would be ME making the deal, that the burden to bear would be on ME, it is the only way to not only save the captive, but to keep us all alive. they reluctantly agreed. oh and the jokes the players made about a paladin making a deal with a devil, which I guess was kind of making the burden feel even greater, made it easier to roleplay it.
Great vid. I’ve played a paladin of Gond. It’s worth noting that before you play this class look at the rest of the party and maybe ask the group how the paladin could be the balance or voice of reason in the group.
Paladins are fun characters to have as party members because they’re really fun to manipulate. Because they are so lawful, you just have to convince them that what you want them to do is the best way of following through with their code. They also can be fun to mess with because they always take the high road. In one campaign I’m in, all of the chaotic alignment party members mess with the paladin who stays with the party because he doesn’t trust the rest of the party to be good, and everyone enjoys that dynamic.
I've always hated and fought the idea that a paladin must be lawful. What about the chaotic gods' paladins ? Well, one could argue that only lawful gods need paladins to enforce their view on civilisation. But surely they all have an agenda and view of things that requires (or could benefit of) mortals to be fulfilled. Every time a god could use mortals as weapons against their enemies or enforcers of their will, their should be paladins. Because that's what paladins do, they fight for their god. Not because their god should be the only one in the pantheon (and therefore their view should be the only one), but because their god needs them. I like to see paladins as pawn in those higher schemes (which could be as petty as mortal ambition), those divine games of checks played on the mortal plane. And their aligment itself serves the goal of their god, even if it's not theirs. Every god has an agenda and a view of things, but ultimately those are limited. For example, Kelemvor is the achnemesis of all undead and necromancers, but out of that, he doesn't really care about street justice, politics or the fact that the rogue of the party is pickpocketing on the market. Nor should his paladin. As a paragon, the paladin shouldn't concern themselves with the methods of the mere mortals (not even their party members), day by day, EXCEPT when it comes to the grand scheme that themselves serves. Unless, of course, if their god concerns themselves with day by day demeanor, which is a little bit dull. This allows (in my games at least) a wide variety of pesonalities amongst paladins of a same deity. Which brings contradiction in places where their gods doesn't concern themselves, therefore good intrgues and roleplay.
I've taken a liking to the impression that to espouse yourself to the ideals of another and follow their example or enact their will is to be lawful. If a chaotic god does not follow a code, in order to enact that god's will properly, you must follow the code--or more accurately, their example--of not following a code. In that way, one becomes lawful in their anarchy. If they're doing something because a higher authority demands it, they are following the law of that authority, and, in essence, being lawful. WHAT they're doing, as to whether or not it's good or bad, is irrelevant. Being a Paladin is all about fitting the demands of their personal authoritative figure. To be neutral as a Paladin would be hypocrisy, picking and choosing what parts of a god's will you would follow. To be chaotic as a Paladin would be to rebel against your god's commands. Paladins don't recognize the law of the land as being THEIR law UNLESS their god tells them to do so. They answer to a higher authority, and I think that changes the meaning of what 'lawful' is to them in a way only the Cleric, or, to a far lesser extent, a Druid, could compare. That's just a different way of looking at it, I guess, not that any way is completely right or wrong. A die has many sides.
One thing I like about 5th Edition is that they put less emphasis on the divine aspect of Paladins and more on their devotion to their cause. I play a Paladin character that isn't devoted to a specific deity but is instesd devoted to his mission of protecting the world from the forces of darkness. His order takes anyone with the skill and devotion to take up that cause.
I had a very fun narrative similar to the peacock paladin. This one has the varient knight noble background to include a squire. The best part: the squire does everything. Saves the damsel in distress, fends off the dragon, etc. However the paladin has such high charisma he is able to convince everyone he did it and nobody questions why he keeps needing a new squire(they all die heroicly)
A good example of a Paladin in pop culture (without the powers) is Jon Snow when he was part of the nights watch. He took an oath to an organization and follows the laws and bonds of said organization.
I find that a multi classed Paladin is a guarantee joy to role play. Play it for what it is as there is never a excuse to kill or molest in any sort of way hence their willingness to do combat in all it's diplomacy. Build a palace (that means it has a dungeon too...) & spar, exercise & meditate. You must gather your party before venturing forth..
As a typical rogue player I also hate the stigma placed upon my characters as "Not trustworthy, steals shit, will betray you because it's funny". I actually tend to play a CG or NG rogue who can be incredibly meek, shy and very cunning. I will steal from bad people and sneak the money into a poor person's hands without them knowing who did this for them. I like to be the "hidden hero" or the unknown face of good fortunes. Never brag about it and leave as many RP encounters as I can feeling wholesome. I am also not above assassinating evil characters when it is necessary. I will usually give the benefit of doubt and try to find out for myself wither somebody is lying. I will use words more than murder. And should I be intimidated, I will bow, say nothing more and try to to walk away. But never think that is the last time you'll see me, if indeed you must be stopped. Am I any good at RP'ing a "good rogue". Just asking for honest opinion and if I can do anything better.
If a Paladin does break their oath, I just tell them to swap to an Oathbreaker Paladin until they atone. I also have a few homebrew warlocks they a player can use if they even piss off their patron to the point of getting their powers taken away from them.
Paladins, and Rightful Good charakters in general are some of my favorites. But only if they fit in the setting, meaning they should not fit in the setting at all. If in the setting for example, the Kingdom is Rules by a beloved and righteous King and the Paladin would just go about and fight the one or other threat to the good kings rule; then paladins are boring. But if the world is morally grey in grey, ruled by a self serving tyrant where corruption is rampant or a post apocalyptic anarchy where the only law is that of the strong, then a paladin becomes very interesting to me. He is facing seemingly impossible odds, has very little help (most likely only his party) and this leads to some great moral dilemmas for the Rightful Good. If there is not black and white and no right answers, moral and choice becomes difficult.
Paladins are awesome! I love the reluctant pally and helpless hero pally ideas you mentioned. I might role play as a helpless hero pally in the future, that's just very cute and engaging. Some other ideas I have about pally: 1) could be someone who started as a illiterate fighter, and in medieval time getting into a religious order is one of the cheapest option to get one educated (look at history's great monk/nun scholars), so they became fighter pallies; 2) Just like real life theologians, pallies from different orders or even individual pallies can have different understandings on even the same god(s) and the story potential is just endless from there. Ultimately it could even be settled by how the pally (pallies) performs in the adventure and/or his/her dice throws. (Might not be to some ppl's liking but this is how fate and unknown does to ppl with beliefs in real life so) IMO a pally can be a conflicted and interesting individual just like anyone else if not more so. To me, having a belief and an standard to live by and build character around/against just makes things so much clearer than classes who doesn't require a define background or with nebulous backgrounds.
One type I think you missed out on is what I like to call the Integrator. Its the paladin from an atypical race (lets say Orc) That serves a god more accepted in a wider community (lets say Pelor here) to help bring stability to their peoples, either because of the community they were raised in being particularly peaceful or just wishing for their people to have a generally better quality of life. Its a great archetype to work with because it opens up a lot of RP potential for the GM, the player, and the party. The GM gets to construct narratives where the ingrained culture of the player race butts heads with the paladins personal code of conduct. The player gets to help guide that narrative, meanwhile also dealing with stigma due to their background, possibly from paladins of the same order. The party gets to watch, but also have far more lee way to add their two cents on the topic, either by (from their perspective) rightfully criticizing the paladin's races/gods customs and beliefs or being unsure of weather integration is a good thing for either side. Since this problem isn't a devil that can just be rightfully smashed, a lot of thought (and character development) can be put into it. It also provides the paladin with a clear objective and one they could easily FAIL at or just never see results in their life time. And I think thats always something important. Paladins are still paladins even when they fail their quests, so long as they keep to the code. The only major downside to this archetype is that it can be a bit contentious, either due one or more party members treating the issue indelicately (making other players uncomfortable) or causing racial alignment arguments (are orc babies chaotic evil and such). So its definitely one of those archetypes you'd want to make sure your groups comfortable with before getting into.
I'm new to d&d, only familiar with 5e and used Knights Templar and crusaders in movies for reference. Also, to some degree I consider Captain America a modern take on a paladin who is still strictly good, but has so much conflict with social and political issues and just tries his best, never giving up. Long ago, like during the years of the crusades, it was common to view people who didn't follow the same faith as their own as not even people.
The key to playing a party oriented Paladin is self discipline and focus on the bigger picture. Your guidelines, oaths, etc are yours to bear, not the party's. You and your comrades are together to face down greater evils, to protect Innocents, etc. You shouldn't be focusing on the sins of your fellows. Your God has brought them into your life as a helping hand to achieve greater things. If a rogue is in the party, for example, and has a penchant for pick pocketing, the Paladin could mention her in prayers for redemption, without condemning her outright. He could persuade her to use her talents to pick pocket the bad guys for keys or info or to disarm them. Instead of pressuring the party toward inaction, a Paladin could guide them to more proper actions. Support their god given desires and talents, not supress them. 👍 Bless to be blessed and all that jazz.
So the Knights Radiant of Brandon Sanderson's _Stormlight Archive_ are all just 5th edition paladins? Who gain power by swearing oaths, but are restricted from certain paths at the same time? I might have to rethink the way I perceive paladins, because I really admire some of the characters in that series. Perhaps I should have realized it earlier: the first main character in those books is literally named Kaladin.
Yep, they're a really good example, though Sanderson's said he also deliberately included radiants who totally defied "magic knight" stereotypes. Lift is a 13 year old latina-looking girl, for example, and Kaladin doesn't really like swords as a weapon in comparison to spears. :P
Paladin subclasses (with timestamps) 11:35 Traditional Paladin 12:05 The good example 13:13 Desprite Excapie (reluctant paladin) 14:54 Last of their kind 15:52 Helpless hero 16:47 Blackguard(rebel) vrs. Paladin of an evil god 18:18 Peacock 19:20 Hospitalir(passifist) 21:45 Fall from grace story 22:30 Redemtion story 23:01 Tragic hero
a paladin concept i came up with is in conflict with his goddess, yet unknowingly embodies her ideals. the way he views himself is different from how his goddess does, and it's this misunderstanding which shapes his character.
if you want your paladin to be a adventure, work with the oaths! There are endless possibilities and if push comes to shove; Oathbreaker ark 🤩 you still get to keep the class features! I "homebrew" divine smite to do necrotic damage for some flavour💃
In our live FM radio campaign, our paladin (Cruven Spine Crusher) is a Half Orc who grew up as a Barbarian. His village became infested with Undead, and Cruven escaped with the help of a paladin who sacrificed himself. Cruven became a self taught paladin to honor his ally. It allows for some great role playing with the character's interpretation of paladin rules, and as a paladin with the personality of a barbarian. "Stop being evil or I will rip out your spine and use it as a Handel for tankard" you can listen to the show live on 89.1 fm WPHS or on the Tune In app from 5pm-7pm (eastern time zone). We also have the first episode up on our RUclips Page.
I played a 2nd edition for 7 years lawful stupid was fun. How the rules are enforced and how the party deals with an Idealistic teenager in my case made the game more interesting
I was playing with my friend, and I played a paladin based on Erza Scarlet from Fairy Tail. I thought I was playing in a silly slapstick anime (much like Fairy Tail) and playing Erza the sort of "older sister taking care of childish siblings" as Erza was in the series. Unfortunately, I upset the warlock player. We are all still good friends, but I learned my mistake from that, and always play a paladin as sort of a champion character.
You should see the Paladin in the party i DM for. A single Goblin jumped out of a bush with a tiny knife, and very badly tried to rob them (they were level 6 and they're a Gunslinger Fighter, a Swashbuckler Rogue, and a Paladin). It couldn't have hurt them in it's wildest dream. Pretty much immediately, the Paladin grabbed the Goblin, and drained the life from him (He has an ability Similar to Chill Touch).... He now has 24 Ac (+2 Plate, and a Tower Shield, which gives +4), and, due to a level in Sorcerer, can cast Shield, for 29 Ac. And there's something else that gets him up to 31, but i don't remember what. He's now a Paladin of the Lord of Time (Not quite a god, long story), so doesn't really have any Paladin rules that stop him doing stuff, aside from, don't fuck up time.
Previously responded to this saying Shield shouldn't stack with a Tower Shield, but reading how 5e handles the Shield Spell, it would work. So nevermind, carry on.
My GM for one of my weekly games, refers to our pali as the "unconventional palidan." This guy tends to be, rude and crude, he will say "Gods damn" and he is paraniod enough to detect evil on everyone he meets.
I really like Paladins who are a bit older (for their species at least) and have seen a lot. They´re more wise and less stubborn than those youngsters in chrome armor. They are experienced enough to know that there are more ways than one to stay true to their faith and still solve the issues ahead. In pop culture, one of those Paladins to me is Cpt. Picard (the TNG Picard, not the Picard Picard). He´s a great leader, absolutely stays true to the UFP´s rules and directives, even against the UFP itself but he always takes every point of view into consideration and manages to disagree in a civil way. His method is very philosophical because he knows that the rules he follows and his vows need interpretation to be adapted to different situations. That´s the point where a good character is important. Someone who doesn´t care could interprete almost any rule in almost infinite ways. But the Paladin embodies the ideals of the one who created the rule and is therefore capable of an interpretation that might deviate from the exact words written but stays true to the idea behind the creation of that rule. In our real world religions, that´s exactly what happens. To take (roman catholic) christianity for an example: There are many different orders within the catholic church that do things very different but they´re still all roman catholic. Every priest should read the same passages of the Bible to his parish and preach about it. But with three different priests you will probably have three different homilies with three different specific advices for everyday life, yet the idea behind it and the goal of the advices are the same for all three of them. Religions in a fantasy setting do not have two millenia of tradition and history, but as a Paladin player you should invest a bit more onto the complexity of your religion than just creating like five rules that you will follow in the most literal way possible. Create a bit of a theological dispute in your order and suddenly you have at least two possible ways of interpretation of these rules.
My favorite character to run ever was a paladin. I did not run the stereotypical "Lawful Stupid" I chose a background and deity that precluded use of metal armor among other alterations to the norms. At the end of the mission where the paladin earned the EXP for 8th level a high level cleric of a different deity tried to award a set of spectacular plate armor, which I refused: "I am sorry but my vows prevent me from making use of or even possessing such items" so the DM had the priests commission a special set of white leather. (then I moved and never found out what stats he was going to give the armor)
I have a Paladin/hexblade warlock character who failed his first quest and feels he’s lost his gods favor, he’s now desperately seeking to regain his gods favor and in so doing has been tricked by something pretending to be his god so potentially evil things are justified as “the greater good.”
right now I'm playing a paladin who was born into power and didn't realize it, the "god" that his people worship is the sun itself (Amaunator if you want a specific god, but they don't directly follow nor pay attention to this god) so his power comes from the divine power of nature itself. He's not a traditional sort of paladin that tries to impose goodness on others, but is driven by trying to understand where evil arises and trying to undermine it through understanding and embracing those who would otherwise fall to its devices. His story is that he was born with these powers and he should harness them to protect the ones he loves... His driving force is that his people for so long were seen as brutish and dangerous and susceptible to demonic influence (minotaurs), and he wants to prove to himself and to others that they don't have to be like that anymore... It's been very fun.
When you were talking about the "last of their kind" type of paladin the first character that came to mind, In terms of personality at least was Superman (specifically the DCAU version from the late 90s early 2000s). I mean, I know his powers aren't granted like a paladin, but the drive do be an example, and the rules he feels he should follow and all that seem to fit the archetype, if not the specifics of the class.
![BAK Jay - Find Out (For Your Love) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/10FJO_XBCvY/mqdefault.jpg)
![[DOKKAN BATTLE] Worldwide Campaign Announcement Video Part 2!](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JpT5Voak6WA/mqdefault.jpg)
1 - Be OP at damage dealing
2 - Be OP at giving support
3 - Be OP in interacting with NPCs
4 - ????
5 - Profit!!!
be OP at damage against certain foes or behind a few other choices, be preaty bad at support but at least you can, be good but not best at npc interaction all together Profit
@@goreobsessed2308 Fair enough. How would you rate the Sorladin comparatively?
@@goreobsessed2308 Not really, no. The only foes he would get behind by a considerable margin is those either resistant or immune to radiant damage and those are very few and far between (not to mention usually things paladins wouldn't fight), everything else he should be able to keep ahead of the other classes (minus multiclass shenanigans or getting magic items, which in 5e are never a guarantee) in damage without much problem really as the class that gets to surpass it if the fighting day gets long enough is the fighter starting at lvl 11 and even then it takes quite a bit considering Improved Divine Smite is there.
Although i will admit, he has a huge lack of ranged options, but that doesn't really make his damage not OP as that problem also happens with pretty much any class that isn't focused on it or characters that are built for the melee like every paladin is.
He can buff the defense, he can buff the offense, he can heal, divine aura is a huge boost to the party STs AND he is a powerful enough damage dealer that can burst stuff down and tip the action economy scale, so he can actually draw aggro and tank since if he gets ignored there is a good chance he can wipe the enemies faster than they can wipe the other squishy party member, especially considering how dying and healing interact in this edition... pretty strong support overall. The only thing he lacks a bit is out of combat support, but being a martial class that is to be expected and desired... he still gets a lot more than the other martials though, while also being ahead of them in combat for the majority of time so he is OP in this front too.
Not being the best at interacting with NPCs is subjective, as not only the skills can be used to do it and this usually is more up to the player skill than the character itself. That being said, even if he isn't the best overall, he is still way ahead of the other martial classes outside of maybe the ranger when it comes to the class giving you tools to do so and in that regard it makes him indeed "OP".
@@rafaelcastor2089 never played 5th paladin so no idea on that their alright in 3rd and it's relatives I prefer going ranged with em though to many intelligent flying monsters raining spells on me
@@goreobsessed2308 Eh... fair enough. The video was about palies in general and i didn't explicitly said i was talking about 5e either, so i brought this on myself
One of the Best Paladin character is Captain Jean Luc Picard.
He is always calm and collected
He has always a weighed and measured response
He is always the voice of reason
He is brave yet not foolish
Except (in terms of the classic lg paladin) he's clearly Lawful Neutral with good leanings. Jean Luc was to hard on following the prime directive he'd land in LN. Great character, great build for newer "don't' have to be LG" types but yeah in classic terms not a paladin.
He also can fight.
he only sees four lights.
@@ParanormalEncyclopedia However he breaks the Prime Directive on occasions it would suit him and follows the Prime Directive in situations where it was nothing but detrimental.
@@ParanormalEncyclopedia Nah...Picard is a good guy.
Paladins in 5e get their powers from their oath not their god. It is a very important distinction that allows them to be a knight errant more than a templar.
YES. THIS.
I love this, because the oaths are not linked to a god. My favorite paladin ever was a Redemption Paladin who wasn't divinely powered by choice or offer. He had literally force of willed himself these powers. It was amazing.
The cleric:
"Wait, that was a heal spell."
Paladin:
"Was it?"
C:
"Yah, I didn't know a god powered you."
P:
"Uh, no? I worship no god, only want to find revenge for my family."
C:
"What, how."
P:
"MY SHEER FORCE OF WILL HAS MADE ME DIVINE!"
In brightest day, in blackest night, no evil shall escape my sight, let those who worship evil's might, beware my power... Green Lantern's light!
THIS IS WHAT I NEEDED TO HEAR
It is not the oath of a paladin, that gives then their power, it is their devotion to a goal, as they only speek out their oath once he is sure what they are Willing to devote themselves to (at level 3 they make their oath, hopefully of devotion)
That is correct this is an dolt to the third power of stupid.
I had a campaign where I played a LG paladin and my friend played a CN rogue. My paladin was very sheltered and naive and the rogue was constantly persuading him that the stuff he has does isn't bad and it has hilarious.
Naive paladin is kinda fun.
(+Chazzle) Intelligent rogue convincing a dumb paladin to do what the rogue wants them to do is one of my favorite dynamics. I had a character who figured out that if they convinced the paladin that something else was the greater evil (5e Oath of Vengeance), then the paladin would do basically whatever they wanted. My rogue exploited the blind lawfulness of the paladin and their oath.
@@GogiRegion, laughs in lawful evil oath of conquest
I wish to input my own 2 cents on the concept of the Paladin. You put a very heavy emphasis on Paladins serving the will of the Gods. Though I cannot deny that is "the Paladin thing", to say that alone is a narrowed way of viewing the class concept.
Paladins fall into one of either two categories: Crusaders or Templars. What you've been speaking heavily of are the Crusaders. The ones that carry the teachings of their god(s) in the attempt to repel the forces of evil and corruption and bring about the good in as much as possible. Crusaders are, arguably, the more Cleric-orientated aspect where the abilities a Paladin receives come directly from Divine intervention.
Templars, however, are more inclined to follow their Paladin *Order* . They are the ones who, under the guidance of a higher power or teaching, have sworn eternal brotherhood to each other. They are the ones who are more down-to-earth about their position and more geared towards communal aspects of life, rather than the Divine. Do not get me wrong, they still serve a higher power, but that higher power could be the Paladin Order itself, rather than a god or goddess. I would say they're the more Fighter-inclined half of the class than the Crusaders. Their power comes from the will of the Order, the martial training of their Order, the optional birthright into the Order, the *community* of the Order.
That is how I've come to understand Paladins after a few years of playing and watching several. It annoys me greatly when the guidlines of a Paladin are strictly "Thou shall not lie, Though shall not take more than given, etc." You can play so many more types Paladins if you can just understand that while one Paladin may serve the Goddess of the Courts, another one would be a member of the Order of Secrets.
I like the Templar Paladins more, as well. Currently I'm running a campaign where I didn't wanna bother with deities, so divine power is reskinned as a form of magic where they draw power from embodying their ideals/oath/creed (non-religious version). For example, a cleric might truly believe in helping and healing others, and travels the land and braves the dangers in order to do it, or a paladin might adhere to the Way of the Warrior. I think that's more interesting and more flexible than gods.
Definitely! I actually like that take on integrating divine aspects directly from the magic system. I'll have to bring that up to my group. Since there are no "commandments" when it comes to magic, it'll be much more fun to create different Paladin personalities without being mind slaves to their supposed one truth.
I love this distinction, it actually encapsulates a lot about the Paladin concept quite handily.
I apologize for the late response. I didn't get the notification to this.
I agree Paladins receive their divine powers from some higher source. They do not study for it, it's not by bloodline, it's not archaic nor arcane. There needs to be some similar guidelines to the Clerics since Paladins are a mix between them and the Fighters. And depending on the GM, it would make sense gods are the only divine beings that can grant a Paladin their powers.
But take a look at Druids. They can opt to be servants to nature gods, but it's generally more acceptable if players just want to be the allies of nature, pure and simple. No god required. They draw their powers from their druidic circle and the very energy of life itself. They have sworn to become one with nature and never abuse it. They can make a pact with creatures of the natural world, command the very natural elements of magic, change their form to - literally - be one with their domain, etc.
Take those aspects and think about using those as a template for the source of the Paladin's powers. Obviously, they need to serve some metaphysical idea whose purpose is to establish unwavering faith. Something that would drive the Paladin to fight the forces of anarchy and/or evil. Since they're also referred to as Holy Knights, incorporating their Order would also be a near necessity.
As I see it (and believe me, I know I do not speak for anyone but myself), the Paladin Order would be as good a substitute as a god. Generations upon generations of faith, hierarchy status, and relentless studies of said faith- I believe it sounds near identical to a Cleric's source of power when you take away the names. That is why I refer to it as 'Higher Power'. A concept that empowers the faith and mind of sentient beings to perform extraordinary feats by sheer will and belief. Gods are the common 'Higher Power' and easiest to understand. But to a native American back in the 1400's (using them because I live in the USA), their 'Paladins' wouldn't be followers of gods like Pelor or such. They would be the champions of individual spirits that made up their homes. Champion of the Buffalos, of the Rain Spirit, of the River Tribe, of the Desert Land... You see what I'm getting at here, right? What I mean to say is if you want to flavor your games to reflect, say, Native American culture, would you ban Paladin classes because your game wouldn't incorporate gods like the game provides? You have every right to. It's up to whoever's running the show to interpret the rules. But there is potential to read the fine print and expand to greater heights.
jeeshwa123 I completely agree, I don't agree with this whole "Power comes from the Oath" idea that most people have. I believe they draw power from a higher being, their Oath is a vow to that being to grant them that power to fulfill it
No one going to mention the genius TMNT comparison? That is a good example.
I thought also of the Blues Brothers.
They were on a mission from God.
Shameless self promotion:
My raggedy channel.
ruclips.net/channel/UC_a1V5vakvPI3EvcCaMfvgQ?
NItpick: Leonardo IS the best fighter of the 4 in pretty much every adaption
What about the T100 in T2?
@@DusBeforeDawn2008 the more recent versions have Raph at the most 'powerful' fighter but Leo is the most skilled and disciplined. if the fight needs strategy and tactics, Leo is your man. if it's a straight brawl, Raph is your go to. Donis more in Leo's vein of skilled but weaker, and Mike has just been chaos incarnate. not really strong but unpredictable enough to be an annoyance.
Except the fact that Leonardo was the best fighter. Don was the smartest, Mike was the goofball, raph was the hotheaded plot device (in a bad way) but Leonardo was the leader, best fighter, Splinters #1 turtle. None of them were LG, but I guess Leo would've been the closest.
Nice, I'm currently playing a goblin paladin xD.
Several months ago we have cleared out a camp of goblin scouts and took one hostage. Some time later, after travelling with us, the goblin became more civilized and we left him at a church, where he sworn to help the monks (doing some busy work - cleaning stuff etc, since we didn't really want to carry him around a lot). And 2 sessions later - my barbarin rolled a one, while throwing my teammates over some giant hole in a dungeon. So when throwing the last guy and getting a one - he immediately sheated his waraxe, hit it against the wall, allowing a small gap of time for the last party member to get to safety and slipped down into the abyss. So the wery next session, when the party came out of the dungeon - a familliar face in full-plate armor greeted them xD.
The Paladin has always been my favorite class. This is the Arthurian knight who has sworn to protect the innocent, the missionary who leads by example and gentle persuasion. The real problem in 2nd Edition was the requirement of Charisma to be 17 or higher, which always used a stat roll that could otherwise be put into Strength or Dexterity.
I once had a lot of fun playing an insane paladin who believed himself to be a god who had been banished from the heavens and deamed unworthy. He was a peaceful man who considered violence a last resort, seeking to encourage others by example. Ironically the party fighter actually became a worshipper of this paladin (although this was somewhat undermined by the fact that this same fighter believed axes were a sentient lifeform and often had conversations with them).
Hilariously, at one point my paladin prayed to himself for divine intervention and he got it! We looked up the 1st edition chanecs of divine intervention, performed all the necessary calculations and it worked out at 4%. I picked up those two ten siders and rolled 02. A genuine miracle occurred because this virtuous knight believed himself to be a god! It ended up placing him in more danger but it bought the rest of the party time to ascend the 200ft verticle shaft to face the villain who would have been able to put a very nasty plan into action if the paladin had not miraculously gained all the equipment he had left behind in town (it was a city adventure so he'd gone without arms and armour so as not to cause discomfort to the locals) and levitated up the vertical shaft to face the foe.
Sometimes miracles do happen :).
One of my favorite little bits of Paladin-dom is from Pathfinder. A Paladin archetype called the Vindictive Bastard.
It's for the Paladin who falls from grace, and then looks up to the heavens and says, "Nyuh-uh!" They're fallen, and get a lesser form of some of their abilities back, fueled by their stubborn refusal to ever admit they were wrong.
But best of all, at 17th level, when others would get the Aura of Righteousness ability, the Vindictive Bastard instead gets the Aura of Self-Righteousness.
Such a silly thing.
The idea of the paladin in the old days was you are super powerful because you are going to role play yourself to death. People who wanted the power without the price (I’m looking at you munchkins) have been a bane of the class. The other major problem has been people who wanted to be selfish asses, a paladin could always travel with chaotic party members, they were only ever barred from traveling with EVIL.
The paladin is a manifestation of the gains of principle and sacrifice. To balance moving from this ideal we have seen the paladin depowered to justify the less restricted version of the class.
Then another problem of people who lack the imagination to see a paladin as anything other than “my disapproving father”.
we actually had a paladin of Iomedae and a lawful evil sorcerer who worshipped Asmodeus together in a party in our Wrath of the Righteous campaign (Pathfinder), who worked very well together basically for the forces of law against chaotic evil demons. The premise was that the paladin had always hopes to eventually redeem the sorcerer from her evil ways, because although she worshipped and conjured devils, she was very cooperative and helpful and even put party needs before her own in some cases and they agreed on certain bases for example to not take slaves in their combats, to grant every criminal a trial, set down a codex of law that they could agree on and just had to work things ot beforehand so they could operate together... and they did. It was time-consuming, it wasn't easy, but they eventually worked it out and they were really effective as a team.
Most people that state 'a paladin must absolutely not travel with evil people' forget that the alignment system is not rigid. There is redemption, there is fall from grace and Paladins are usually not only about punishment, but also about redemption and converting people to their faiths. And if they think they have to walk the long walk for someone that they feel can see the light one day, then why should they just cast them away instead of trying everything in their might to better them?
Hope Johnson that’s amazing! I’d actually enjoy playing or watching something like that as it unfolded.
@@wanderdragon1075 it was, but we finished the campaign like 3 or 4 years ago. Said sorceress became a vampire somewhere down the road, but it didn't really affect her gameplay since she had been LE anyway, so she was mostly cranky, that she couldn't eat all her favourite foods anymore. She still worked with the party towards the greater goal and in hopes to being able to True Resurrect her one day the paladin even started to court her.
Sadly it didn't work out in the end since she grew way too fond of her new undead powers and the Paladin begrudgingly gave up on her as that became too obvious. He's Level 20 and single now, sitting in the High Council of Drezen and she went on to explore different parts of the world and acquired a taste for the blood of adolescent boys... ehm... yes. At least it worked until the campaign goal was achieved...
The medieval paladin however was much more amusing... he ran around shouting that everyone is possessed by the devil and to worship a specific god and to follow them and... we that’s how the crusades began.
Currently having fun playing a paladin of Sarenrae who has a rather low intelligence score. A score of 7, to be exact. So I'm playing her as a bit of a ditz who is nevertheless kind to everyone. She considers the code she lives by to be a code for herself alone and understands that other people do good in different ways. She may just ask endless questions because she's curious about their views and might be a bit too stupid to understand them when they speak in abstract terms, but she ultimately means well and hopes to be an inspiration to others in time.
Paladin: Being a paladin is always great! You're popular for your tanking and healing skills. Everyone loves your company! you're too perfect but, who cares, you'll never be bored.
Now add being an asimar on top, XD
@@randomlygeneratedname I love Aasimar as Clerics though...
clericofchaos1 That's true in 5e at least, but in previous editions they are extremely hated and specifically in 3rd edition they are considered the weakest class and were severally dependent on multiple stats which meant they became very underwhelming of a class.
Honestly, I can't even come anywhere near 3rd edition anymore because 5e fixed Paladins so much that they are one of the best classes in the game.
thats the world of warcraft that you play
Roguelock or Barbarian
There's another kind of Paladin I think, but it only works in a specific story - the Humble Hero. The one who worked hard to become a paladin but not to go on crusades or anything, but to protect their home. Maybe they suffered some traumatic experience when they were young and now want to make sure that doesn't happen to anyone else again. They don't intend to go off on some epic quest but events may conspire to draw them in anyway.
I say it only works in a specific story because of that last bit. I made a paladin like this for a Pathfinder campaign going through the *Wrath of the Righteous* Adventure Path where the very premise of the campaign would force them to be part of the adventure and, ultimately, it would be for the same reason they became a paladin; to protect their home (or what's left of it after the campaign's opening - anyone who's read the blurb for Part 1 should know what I mean).
I've got a real soft spot for the paladin as an archetype. I tend to favour the kind who focuses on defence and returning enemy damage.
I would like to say something regarding Paladins as it was, and still is rather, the chosen class for my very first DnD character.
I was not even very sure of what a Paladin was at the time (insert Spoony paladin meme here), but I knew they were kind of party poopers, or at least were considered as such by most players.
What I did to avoid this issue, was to make it a person who believes people can change, and sees the goodness in them. This way when I had to lecture, my teammates often felt encouraged by my words instead of being pissed by being yelled at.
But I did something else. Something accidental which turned out for the better. In my disregard for the stat, I completely ignored Wisdom. This made me unable to perceive or insight people in any good fashion, hell I didn't even have proficiency in either of those stats.
So suddenly, my paladin was finding herself defending the party, and claiming how such honorable warriors and upstanding members of society could possibly never break into a secluded and restricted section of the library and stolen a sensitive piece of information regarding a long forgotten dungeon for themselves.
All the while the other players were bursting in laughter because they totally fucking stole it. :p
Although I'm younger I've been playing dnd and dming for 4 years now. Just discovered your channel earlier this week. Love these videos and I've been learning a lot. Thank you so much for such a great resource.
The most fun I had with a paladin;
Ordred, my Arthurian paladin
(heavily influenced by Tristram)
Sworn to the Lady Margrev
Fought, Drank, Fornicated, Suffered,
Volunteered 2days a week at the “Healers off the Square”when in town.
One of my favorite paladin narrative lines from the kits in AD&D 2, paladin handbook is the idea of the Expatriate: where the institution granting paladin-hood has become corrupted yet the individual (perhaps a small sect) remains true to the deity itself - thus remaining "lawful and good" to their deity yet "unlawful and evil" to their former institution... and whatnot...
I played a paladin type who was raised by a hermit. Most of the time he ran around in leather armor with a staff, leading a donkey who was his pack animal. This guy would fight, using his powers sparingly, but mainly acted as a counsellor for the other characters. He saw great potential for good in them and so was subtly trying to steer them in the right directions. His whole crusade was a spiritual one, to find companions that he could help become better people than what they were at the start.
A personal favorite approach to doing a Paladin is to actually lean into the cliches of the bad Paladin. To make a deconstructive lampoon of the Lawful Good mr-do-no-wrong. To me, the absolute best race for Paladin is Warforged. The idea would be that a church raises a child, thought to be a chosen messiah, to adhere to the ideals of the Paladin. Depending on the milage for adult themes in the game, this can anything from simple pressure to perform to outright abuse, but regardless, the child grows up with this twisted ideal of perfection that no human is able to live up to. So, the child binds his/her soul to the body of a machine, abandoning his/her worldly needs and begins losing more of his humanity by the day, in an attempt to become the perfect vessel for his god's will, the god itself reacting however DM sees fit.
The character I play is a 14 year old boy, who at 12, was pawned off by his noble family to squire for an old paladin. The paladin my character squires for (he's a PC as well) is teaching him the ways of his god, in hopes that I will replace him when he grows too old to serve his god effectively. My character sees him as role model, and something of a father figure, and during fights, focuses his healing and buffs on him more than the others in our party, though that does upset some of the other players sometimes.
I love the versatility of a Paladin in combat. In combat, I would play different roles depending on what we seemed to need at the time. Our Druid was similar in that role.
My character was often the moral compass of our group. At least until we ran into a group of heretics and oathbreakers. They were a bit surprised when I murdered all of them.
1) A general tip: When I used to run campaigns I did the trick that if someone wanted to skate their alignment restrictions I would have them make a WIS check. 2) For Paladins a good restriction is to really enforce that they cannot use magic items, or be the voluntary target of spells from other players.
That TMNT reference was absolute gold. This inspires me to perhaps play a paladin for my next series on my channel, I completely forgot the Paladin Kits. An excellent foundation for a character, thank you for the ideas and inspiration for my own videos and stories, as always, Guy!
In my setting paladin are actually inquisitors and they serve all the gods, but there is no alignement gods, like the god of good or god of bad or god of magic, rather a god embody a concept with no morality, time is one, death (all must die to feed the gods), truth (as truth is in fact all that exist) and all these gods are at war with a god of pain (which again is not inherently evil). So the goal of (most of) the paladin is to prevent pain and suffering and that's interesting because if an inquisitor see someone suffering they can help them by healing them, or killing them so the god does not decide the morality of its servant.
I have drawn up a paladin just recently, a paladin who fights for redemtion. The kind of paladin who isnt proud of their past and teaches the naïve the lessons the paladin has learned over time.
I tend to see different classes as exemplars of a specific trait, concept, or mentality. Barbarians are icons of fury unbound, fighters pragmatiam, rogues the paragons of greed, rangers loyalty, wizards are exemplars of the power of the mind, sorcerers of inner potential, et cetera.
The paladin, to me, is the exemplar of stalwart defiance. Where others may give in to rage and temptation, where others may lose themselves to despair, the paladin cannot - will not - give in. They _have to_ stand, even if they must do it alone, for those that can't or won't stand for themselves. Despite what weighs on them, they stand, they defy what seeks to drag them down, they are the vigilant shield.
My best paladin versus rogue type situation (bear in mind, we hardly get to play because we usually just can't get the people together) was probably after the rogue had been picking pockets. He would be stealing and did this a few times, I didn't ever roll any perception to try and catch him. He was getting more carried away with it and eventually rolled poorly and pally saved his little arse. I interject with diplomacy, picking up an old man's purse the thief had fumbled. He's confused but buys it. Then paladin tells rogue "if it happens again you're on your own". I thought about actually rolling an intimidate but the point got across.
That paladin was kind of a dad role play, the more wise than overbearing type as he'd give you space, let you fuck up, bail you out, but if you still haven't learned, you can learn the hard way.
And the player was pretty rude to me when we first met. Somewhat jokingly and maybe was trying to fill me out. But I don't rib back and forth trading insults with someone I've known for 5 minutes.
It's awkward and if you know someone well a few years your burns will really burn.
All and all the guy wasn't so bad.
Talking about the rogue, not the player. ;)
Last week, Nerdarchy did a video on “10 things you miss about D&D” and feeling a little mischievous I slipped into my list “Paladins should be Lawful Good”. Sure enough, people are still arguing about it a week later in the comments section. Obviously, people should play the game however they want but I do think there is a benefit to people getting that old school experience. Try playing a Paladin at least once as the Sir Gawain or Captain America. Be the hero. It makes for a great character and a fantastic role play experience. Just don’t go overboard and play the character as “Lawful Stupid”.
I kinda miss the Lawful Good Paladin, I also think people forget that it's Lawful and Good, and sometimes the best parts are when whats good and what they can do lawfully (either law wise or code wise) differ, that can create a fantastic story in and of it's self.
Paladins should be Lawful UNLESS they serve a Chaotic God.
I play a fall from grace type paladin. He used to be a rich noble that took the oath but never followed any of the tenants and very much a peacock tried kill evil things just for show. But then, one time met a Deva disguised as a hag, got zapped, and was turned into a kobold, stripping him of his luxuries. Up until he met the party, he was living in a kobold den and was found hiding in a corner. So he must pray everyday for forgiveness, genuinely tries, but is really clumsy and bad at it. And every time he screws up, he goes off and and prays for forgiveness again. Also a huge coward, since he's a kobold. Also rolled an intelligence of five
That's a really interesting concept! It's been a year, how did everything turn out? Is the campaign over or still ongoing? I'm very curious :)
One of my characters that I never used is a (Oath of the crown) knight who's oath is basically loyalty vows. He wants to save his misstress from slavery, he's a normal Knight, but with powers from his oath.
I’m playing a centaur paladin. I AM MY OWN MOUNT
Dancan799 I am considering a Centaur paladin myself for an upcoming campaign. probably oath of ancients. did your PC wear heavy armor or something else?
I built an Oath of Ancients centaur Paladin, Vidarin the Vengeful. He'd sacrifice his life to save a dying animal, but smite someone for repeated littering. Lol
The Paladin has always been my favorite. Not just in D&D but just about anything with Paladins. Cecil Harvey, Agrias Oaks and Beatrix in Final Fantasy, for instance. My Bhaalspawn is a Paladin. My favorite iteration has to be Pathfinder's version of the paladin though.
The character I’m working on now is a redemption paladin with the fighting style of fisticuffs. He swore off using a “weapon” due to a training accident where his fellow student used a sword of vengeance in a sparring match.
For me while the need to be the "lawful good" has been removed from many modern versions of games. I still find that the need to live by a restricting code they should still be required to be lawful, since following a code is practically the definition of lawful.
my view on paladins is usually that they are the devout unbreakable warrior and lays all their trust with their deity that their deity will bail them out or make them invincible in the greatest face of danger or their cause is justified. but i also like the aspect of religion for lots of different reasons, like having religion as a scapegoat or their safety blanket or where they get their sense of honor or their behaviour in context with different laws that are contradictory.
or the most fun when they are intrinsically in contradiction to their own faith but they don't mean to be so they seek redemption often for their misdeeds, kind of like being catholic, being branded a sinner from birth and seeking forgiveness from their deity to ease their conciousness.
an in-game example would be if you were swayed by your party to do something out of your deitys will like stealing, you would need to make amends by doing something good or in accordance with that deitys will or simply pay for absolution in some shape or form.
my simplest view on a paladin is that they are soldiers that just adheres to a deity, a deity that often preaches no violence.
which can be rather conflicting to the soldier since soldiers are trained killers, making paladins a very unique contrasting character in itself
another way of looking at it would be to look at the warlock who makes a pact with a demon, though that person might still be inclined to do good but are swayed to do evil things because of the demon.
and similarly is the paladin in a semblance of a pact with something like an angel like figure but they have a human nature to sometimes do bad but are swayed to do good because of their angel.
it's not allways about blood offerings and sacrifices
and it's not allways about crusades and punishing the wicked.
sometimes it's just how that character tries to get by in the current world they are in.
maybe i missed it but i like to play the humble paladin. One who act's in the will of his god, but is not zealous and more forgiving in the shortcomings of others. this in turn can make him susceptible to deception by others and often leads in the direction of the nearly failed paladin
Great subject and great video...
I used to have such trouble dealing with Players who couldn't get past the stereotype of Paladin... This was also back in 2e (and earlier...lolz) and there really wasn't a lot to do. I had enough on my shoulders with just making Players and GM's alike read the alignment sections out loud before letting the game go on, because of the lack of literacy. Lawful Good is NOT lawful stupid. Likewise, Chaotic Evil does NOT mean absolutely and insufferably brain damaged. I hate that...
SO for the Paladin... Somewhere, it was written that the origin of the Paladin was under the Goddess, Paladine... Palatine(?) Whatever... In any case, having read that, either in a supplement for D&D or in some RPG magazine, I dropped the term Paladin entirely from the system... AND I reskinned the thing a "Holy Knight"... Simple. You no longer absolutely HAD to be Human, nor Lawful nor Good... The powers would be roughly equivalent, and exemplar of your Deity of choice... No need to screw with progression and XP/Level (F*** math)... AND Players were suddenly free to play ANY screwy type of Paladin-esque character they like...
They could be as argumentative and sacrilegious as they liked OR they could be as easy going and generally motivated as they wanted or preferred... SO I would cautiously suggest that in the case there's difficulty understanding just how dynamic the Role can be, you GM's out there shouldn't be afraid to monkey with the mechanics to bring your Players closer to the things they'll enjoy playing without being so hard on the rest of the party...
Never EVER let the rules get in the way of the game. :o)
gnarth d'arkanen I personally believe the only thing a paladin has to be is lawful, and that is because of their vow to their chosen god. Which makes the vow and the god very important. Because that vow and that God decides what things you can accept and what things you can't accept. A lawful evil paladin might be okay with theft so long as they don't get caught because of the creed of their god. So on and so forth. Of course this requires people to research these things before making their paladin.
Okay, Jacob Freeman...
First, let me make a couple (relatively small) points as clear as I can... AND number 1... How YOU prefer to run your games is entirely YOUR craft... and that's perfectly okay, too. When I get the chance and join your table, YOU are GM, and I am Player... Simple as that. Just like I intro' myself as "I don't play God, I even tell Him what to do... so don't insult me." I expect YOU as GM to carry the same "weight"... SO while I will advocate (to my best) my Character in concept and all functions there-in, YOU still hold final say. It is (after all) YOUR craft... at that time.
Second, along with the rule "Never EVER let the rules get in the way of the game." I carry a sort of caveat, "Narrative is EVERYTHING." With adequate Narrative, a GM builds his own license to TAKE agency... similarly, with adequate Narrative (descriptive helps, too) a Player can build his own license (of course subject to the GM and Party's permissions) for agency.
Now, that said, I will agree that your idealism around Paladins (or Holy Knights) holds some credibility. Just as Lawful indicates a structured character that holds to some code of conduct, so also Chaotic indicates some opposition to that in favor of individualism.
However, (advocation of my concept, here} even the fiercest individualist is capable of making a promise or taking a vow and holding onto it. It's probably NOT going to be some ridiculously regimental thing to structure out his whole lifestyle. Let's face it. Individualists are so labelled for reasons and have their limits. BUT for the sake of a believable fantasy-surrealistic world setting, I believe it should be allowed. Plenty of people (IRL) have taken classical vows (and held them) while obviously fitting their surroundings about as well as square pegs and round holes. The Christian faith alone has a fair litany of monks and even several Saints listed for their individualist natures while performing quite handily for the Church... I should suspect (if research were truly available) that Knights have had their share of "weirdo's and misfits" in the ranks.
While it can present terminally disruptive behavior, a thing we GM's must work our hardest to avoid when possible, THAT is still on the Player's shoulders of responsibility. SO he might not be exactly a very successful Holy Knight (or Paladin) but his (or her) alignment shouldn't necessarily preclude him from the attempt... Take the oath, and press it for Role Play... It's a veritable font (in my experience) for creative problem solving... and near no end of hilarity.
Finally, I suggest that a Chaotic Deity might well align with a Chaotic Holy Knight (or Paladin) to a degree that something or other of penance be pronounced for "indiscretions" and even draw that Knight all the closer to the deity, simply because their personalities "mesh" so well... even if at first blush it looks like a recipe for a horrific failure...
In any case, you're certainly free to lay the laws as you see fit. This thread is simply a (hopefully) mindful exercise in concept, meant to give you pause for thought and debate... Thus my original purpose of eliminating the term "Paladin" and replacing it with "Holy Knight" (or "Unholy Knight" as might better fit) for the class... at least the way I usually run at my table... ;o)
gnarth d'arkanen I just wanted to solve the fun killer aspect without making big changes. If the lawfulness of a paladin is a reflection of the vow they took to their god...then would they have to care about anything not covered by their god and vow? It is their god's outlook they are trying to enforce, after all. That the god in question may be chaotic is besides the point. The paladin will rigorously espouse and defend the tenets of their god as proclaimed in their vow all the same ;)
Jacob Freeman,
I'd warn against confusing a "Preacher" with a "Knight" or a "Monk"...
The Preacher, does the preaching... It's his vow and personal duty... AND that's why he's called the Preacher...
The Monk, may espouse all he likes, but many even take a vow of silence... SO... they do their other "brotherly tasks" as such, and narry a word spoken about their god's affluent or influential nature about anything... They copy the scriptures, log and upkeep the teachings (often even outside religious), and maintain the monastery...
The Knight, DEFENDS the following. That's it. If he wins, it's because his god is right and strong. If he fails/loses, it's because either his god is weak or wrong, OR because he has failed his god. That's really all the more tenet you need worry about as far as a vow toward knighthood.
Now, as you pointed out, the alignment of a god really has no bearing. At the same time, the Lawfulness of a Holy Knight should also be considered only a facet of the class, not exactly a requirement. It doesn't particularly have bearing on the why or how that knight was put into position to become a knight either... He's sworn to protect the god's following at status quo, and to spread that following (in military manner) in outward progresses... BUT he is NOT sworn (necessarily) to wander village to village and preach. It would be a waste of his strengths as a protector and military professional, just like a knight for a king or emperor...
Now, some deities may certainly require the whole of regimental stylings. If that's your fancy, and your Players don't feel infringed in their freedoms, it's fine. BUT not all military soldiers are particularly regimental or structured, either. SO I'd hazard that we easily slip into the "rut" of stereotyping and romanticizing the Templar Brotherhood on which the original Paladin kit was based... So think of some of the wilder possibilities if deities are "for real" in the world.
Practically every time I've introduced a Chaotic Holy Knight, there's been some resource for humorous banter between the knight and his (or her) deity, to say the least. It's hardly a fun killer. Half the times, we got into such creative arguments that the whole table joined in... Some defending the knight and others siding with the god... We even had to take breaks just to get our notes straight on what to argue next...
BUT that's us. AND YOU know your table a WHOLE LOT better than I. I'd simply suggest the next time you have a PC-concept of a Holy Knight with a Chaotiic bent to him, you mull it over a bit, rather than shoot it straight down as "stupid". Remember, "Narrative is EVERYTHING" and maybe, even if that Player needs a little help with convincing story, you can see where he wants to go with it. It might not be so bad an idea. ;o)
I believe that is referring to the God Paladine from the Dragon Lance setting, who was basically the leader of the good-aligned Gods and of course LG, who had like an entire knighthood dedicated to him.
Great video, paladins have always been my favorite! The first time it was describe to me, when i was 12, as "A righteous knight of justice" I was hooked!
Thank you for making this video. It was quite informative. I myself am currently running a lawful good paladin in 5th edition D&D. My paladin worships Kira (taken straight from the Death Note anime/manga), so has no problem delivering the guilty to the proper authorities, but at other times, if is out in the wilderness and no proper authorities are available or is killing monsters, has no problem delivering justice at the point of his sword either.
And he donates his loot to open orphanages.
Don’t have to have a deity, a paladin can draw their powers from the strength of their convictions.
The idea of the helpless hero inspires me a bit, it creates possibilities for fantastic backstory. The one that's popped into my head is the idea of a guy, maybe a knight, who as you said does right by nature, purely by their own will. One day they might do a deed particularly selfless or in line with a certain God's beliefs, and the good may present themself, and give the Paladin his powers, starting the quest from level 1.
My only fear is creating a Mary Sue, but that just takes some more thought. Maybe they might struggle with tunnel vision, who knows.
In a 5thEd. I was DMing, there was a CN paladin venerating a drink+song deity with a name seemingly pronounceable only by kenku.
ARGHHHH
YOUR PROFILE HAS CHANGEDDDD!!!!!!!
Great video, paladin is my favourite class I haven't played yet
Finnian Quail Profile as in appearance?
This is the best paladin video I've seen on the class and concept. Thanks for being straight forward, respecting my time, and covering a lot of ideas quickly.
I ran a DnD 5e Oath of Conquest paladin who got murdered in an alley (for snubbing a local lordling) and received a second chance at life from a valkyrie, IF he went about smiting and ass kicking the 'bullies' of the world so that the valkyrie could take some cool stories back to valhalla. much much fun. also, the valkyrie was an active npc. She loved to chat with the paladin without revealing her presence to anyone in the room so, for about 8 sessions, everyone thought my guy was completely delusional. food for thought.
I am so glad I caught this video. I am about to start a new champaign, with a new group and I'm playing a Paladin Wood Elf.
I normally play it as a "Captain America" type.
In watching this video, it got me thinking...
If I fell from grace, why? How about a former Elf General, who years ago sacrificed themselves to a pact with a God (think Warlock) in order to save his Army from certain doom.
It's part redemption (even though it was the most selfless act) and a bit bitter for being locked into the arrangement with a deity that may not have been his own.
The loss of free will, I think is the interesting part to play with here, especially for someone who gave up everything in order to save others.
I'm sort of thinking "reverse Spawn" or "reverse Ghostrider" man... I am kinda pumped about it now.
One of my favourite characters I've ever made was a paladin who fell from grace making a warlock pact, before actually taking an oath at 3rd level (5e d&d) and my DM agreed I could keep those two levels of abilities but not advance to level 3 unless they atoned to the values of their old order or found a new oath to take. The party was mostly sympathetic and tried to gently convince my character to come to terms with the situation and move forward, and some of the moments that came out of that were my favourites in any game I've played.
Unfortunately the DM had a complete lack of restraint or control when it came to the plot, which combined with some out of game issues with the group led to the campaign collapsing. The character was so enjoyable that I've been waiting for a chance to rework some of it into a new campaign with a new group, or at least to play a paladin again.
Yet another epic video pali is my go to class and have played a fair few (5e only)
Best Pali I played that piped back up being used by other GMs as a city founder and great hero and so on
All from his final use by me
He had just had an arm blown off trying to close a hell gate as a siege beast burst out
The party desired to flee...
He could not he was determined to save the party to the point he through party members through a demention door that had been opened by the wizard so they could flee
Ended up being one on one with the beast before the wizard teleported in to get him out
At this point he was failing away from his wounds
But it was very nice hearing him pop up as the other GMs loved the roll and the character so much :-)
Paladin is my favorite class, I absolutely love everything about them from their design and their themes. The only thing I hate is that they have such a stigma against them due to the whole "Purge the heretics and kill all who thinks otherwise from me and my god" stereotype.
My first ever character is a LG blue dragonborn paladin, but the way I got around the LG alignment was that he was a man of the people. While he did follow the law he believed it was put in place as a guide line to keep peace, this it was justifiable to break the law of it was for the betterment of the public. He also was a knight so he could get the party out of legal trouble. My favorite thing about him is the retainers he has. He has the young dragonborn that are his retainers that he would teach them how to live normal lives and become knights.
I’m working on a backup character Paladin that was forced to be humble because the kingdom he served fell to evil, and he got his ass kicked so badly trying to fight them that he basically lost use of most of the right side of his body. So he’s fine working with chaotic rogues because he’s broken and willing to do anything to maintain what he has left of his honor.
He’s based off of Artorias the Abysswalker.
I dig the Icon change.
I have always wanted to play a Paladin but never looked at it this deeply. I believe that I shall try the class out next time I start a new game
I didn't have a good experience playing as a paladin. This is very game-specific and a personal problem on my part, but I constantly found myself in situations where i either kept repeating what I was doing every turn or just not doing much. There was a cap on the smiting the DM enforced, which really nerfed how my character was, and I slowly found myself becoming very bored playing as a character that, compared to my other characters, didn't have enough oomph roleplay-wise or combat-wise. In that same campaign, there was an "alternates" night where, you guessed it, we got to play different characters. So i made my alternate a phoenix sorcerer because the DM allowed Unearthed Arcana and because I wanted to try out being a sorcerer. I had so much more fun playing as this character that I never wanted to touch the paladin again. Even now I just find it would be better to be a cleric for some of the holier aspects or warlock for the smiting aspects. I might play a paladin again to get more experience playing as one, but I'm afraid of running into the same mechanical trap as I had.
Well Paladin is one of my favorite classes, and was the first class I ever played in Dungeons & Dragons. Honestly, I don't care about alignment at all, and I'm not a goody-two-shoes. I'm usually Chaotic Neutral, and serve gods of death lmao. I just play however I feel like playing, and I have fun. I don't restrict myself based on alignment.
This video gave me an interesting idea for a paladin character. Thank you!
Because sharing is caring: I think of someone who lived a normal life but suddenly his village got attacked. At this attack some of the villagers got murdered and the aggressors kidnapped all children. He tried and his wife tried to stop them. As they tried, his wife lost her life and he also was wounded so bad that he was about to die. Right before he would die, a god speaks to him, because his wish to save his child is that strong. The god rescues him and give him devine powers to get back his child and take down these evil guys.
Maybe these evil guys are under control of an evil god or something like that. I think there is a lot of potential for the character to develop and having an character mission that is interesting to the whole party.
My inspiration for my paladin character was slightly inspired by Saint Seraphim of Sarov, with some help from my DM.
His backstory was typical of a paladin; A child who grew up on a farm and in his teen was recruited to a monastery where he was trained as a paladin and took his vows to his god. The elder of the monastery was growing old and had nightmares of dark forces coming to the continent, so he was sent to investigate. There he met the party that was on this quest, which was fitting because their mission was related to the nightmares of the elder. The plot twist came much later when we were tricked by a witch and my character was turned into a toddler. During his curse he broke his vows, because toddlers are too impulsive, and his punishment was that after his mission he would be sent to exile. This exile took place when we had a side campaign where I was DM'ing. During my exile I lived off the forest, and started using the forest as his place of worship. He kept the words of his god, prayed daily, and eventually grew fond of the nature around him. Eventually he was too tired of the tiresome monastery life that he started living for some time as a forest hermit, praying and chilling with the animals around. When I was done dm'ing my exile was over and I chose to return to my party. And that is how I multiclassed into a paladin/druid, who used nature as his medium of worship and service.
So my friends and I are running a home brewed D&D campaign. I play a paladin who is not lawful good. He's actually neutral good. Or he's supposed to be... but I've killed nuns, children, old ladies, and shopkeeps. Recently I accidentally set loose a bunch of Drakes on a small village. So, I looked at my character sheet and my alignment had changed. I asked dm and she said " You're not f*cking neutral good, you beheaded an old lady." My paladin is now listed as Chaotic Evil.
@sum body in 5e it's not so much about gods for paladins as it is about your path.
Update on that drake situation: I murdered three innocent baby drakes.
I think my favorite example of a Paladin falls under the category of the "last of their kind" type, and that is Sturm Brightblade from the Dragonlance Chronicles. He was clearly a Paladin, and he spent the entire "campaign" as the moral compass of the party, but without being at all overbearing. He would do what the party decided to do, sometimes reluctantly, but he was always keeping them aligned to be a force of righteousness in the world.
It saddens me when Paladins are your typical hurrdurr kinda Paladin.
On a side-note, I really love your videos. Thank you so much and have a great day.
Yes! The triton paladin's mount: the Kippergryph
In my experience, at least with the traditional not-black paladins, one advantage to paladins is that you can almost always count on them to be honest or genuine party members in any situation.
Really good series, I’ve sent every vid to my players as you make them. would love to see monk next.
In my current campaign I started out with an Inquisitor character. For anyone who hasn't played them before, Inquisitors are like Paladin's but are usually on the more extreme side of things. They abide by the law of their God and seek to root out those who are against their religion. So the way I played it was he was a lawful good character who tried to treat everyone fairly and keep balance.
However, there were certain acts and people that his religion found to be considered heresy. Those who fell into heresy were considered less than human and subject to death.
I played a character that started as one class, and evil. And through the campaign they had drifted from being lawful evil, to being lawful good, instead of using the law for her own goals, she used the law to protect the innocent, she did so through having religious experiences and becoming a paladin in service to a god.
A bit more detail about it is that I was playing a fighter, who was going for the leader archetype, starting as a city guard with the party being "deputies" under my watch as we investigated a farm that had been cursed, finding the family dead and raised as undead. From there is lead to us discovering a necromancer (whom we also learned was the leader of the town, known as the Governor (though was not elected) but not just that, but that a rakshasa had killed him, taken his place as governor, and the real governor made a pact with Nerull so that he could seek revenge on the rakshasa and the town, in exchange for helping nerull with his plans as well. This is when my character started to really come into a leadership role, beyond just the party as I had begun amassing townsfolk to form a militia, to combat the necromancer who was gaining support as well from a lizarfolk encampment in the swamp. At first my character wanted to peacefully negotiate with the lizardfolk, get them to work for us instead of the necromancer. Negotiations did not go as planned. Though they went well enough that we were able to leave without a fight, but that's where we sent another character's eagle to deliver a message back to town to advance the militia, then we made plans to siege the camp. The fight went spectacularly with our side taking zero causalities. We captured a few of their soldiers, a leader or two got away or killed themselves, and during the fight we discovered that they were using necromancy to raise undead alligators as well as working on other abominations.
All this lead to us finding the location of the necromancer's tower, on a island in the middle of a large lake. We set out to the tower without the militia, but the church had appointed a paladin to help deal with the necromancer with us (an NPC.) When we got to the island we were immediately attacked back a dozen skeletal archers and a giant skeleton. We won the fight but at the cost of two PCs, our rogue, and my character, but the Paladin said that he could use his divine magic to bring *one* of us back, only one, not both. Though he also said that it would be at the cost of his own life as well, but that he had already made up his mind that he was going to do it. And the decision on who came to our Cleric, who she decided that she would pray to her god, Pelor. I to this day do not know what her god told her, but she just said that she heard a voice speak to her and she knew it was Pelor. She never told us what he actually said, but she requested my character to be ressurected, even though at the time my character was lawful evil (keeping her evil acts mostly a secret, as well as keeping her desire to use the fact that the current governor is an imposter and the support of the militia she had formed to place herself as a warlord of the town, imposing strict laws and such.) Even the DM was surprised by her decision, because she partially decided on my character because my character was the so-called tank at the time, absorbed most of the damage while also giving buffs to my teammates to help them in the fight.
We got through the castle, but without killing the necromancer, (and I got a lucky roll on loot, loot that the DM didn't even really plan on anyone trying to loot. Long story short, we defeated a colossal blood hulk by getting an even bigger boulder to roll over and crush him, using a coin to get their attention and stay in one place as the thing rolled over them, then I said, "I want my silver coin back, I will dig through the blood and veins to find it." DM told me to make a series of rolls for loot as well, ended up getting a +5 morning star, still asked, "Did I get my coin back?". Anyway after attacking the necromancer but him escaping, there was a huge explosion and we all found ourselves unconscious waking up on the beach of the island and the tower completely gone. A boat rowed ashore with a single person in it (A young human male that I had employed at the start of the game to help me keep my weapons and armor clean and in top shape, as well as helping me don my armor since it was full plate.) He had his tongue cut out but we managed to get him to write a message, telling us that the rakshasa had made a move and ousted everyone we had told about him being an imposter but told them to keep a sealed lip about it until we had dealt with the necromancer first since it wouldn't have been wise to attack him so soon. He had killed my captain, enslaved many miners from the nearby mine, and sent many others fleeing the city before he quarantined them all in. The one's that escaped made their way to the old lizardfolk encampment that we had the foresite to establish as our own base of operations after taking it from them. The rakshasa was not aware of it's location so it was safe from them. We met up with them at this encampment and at first they did not believe us because the rakshasa had used some trickery and illusions to make the townfolk think we had publicly admitted to assisting the necromancer and that is why the tower had disappeared when we went there, and then made it seem that we had been executed for our crimes. We had to prove that it was us before they let us in. We then took an entire month training the militia, as well as making a trip to a nearby town known for it's highly skilled warriors and we got them to agree to help us in our fight to retake the town and free the people. We also freed the slaves at the nearby mine cutting our enemies from a source of good supplies, as well as giving the people hope. We then used our druid to negotiate with some giant ants to help us, convincing them that the rakshasa's greed and lust for wealth would drive them to driving the ants out of their home. They agreed to help us as well. So our plan was to tunnel our way directly to the governors mansion as well as creating diversion tunnels to undermine a few roads leading to the mansion to distract guards and to prevent them from making it to the mansion easily. While we also had a wave of militia fighters storming the front gates of the wall to put pressure on the enemy. Once again we failed to prevent our target from escaping, but we succeeded in retaking the town.
We were all celebrating the victory, and planning on what we would do next because we knew our fight with the necromancer was not over, and the rakashasa could come back at anytime and shapeshift as any person. So our druid went to the druid grove in town, our cleric went to the temple, and my character ran a few errands, paying mercenaries who she had hired to join the militia, as well as diving out pay for the militia as it had essentially became their job, and she began making plans on how to fill the power vacuum with her in a position of tremendous power, but also allowed her to leave the town as she pleased and not relegated to having to stay in town to run it. In the meantime she needed to talk with the cleric and so she headed towards the temple. Upon entering it and taking a few steps towards our cleric a divine messenger appeared, casting blinding light and speaking in a booming, angry voice. Condemning me, cursing me for stepping foot in the temple, telling my character that Pelor has been outraged by the sacrifice of one of his own paladins to save her life, telling of her evil deeds, of her evil desires, casting shame upon her. And that she must repay a debt, either through devotion, sacrifice of something dear to her (the +5 morning star that she had found, which turned out to be much more later on but that's another story), or her life. And then they vanished, the priests cast my character out of the temple. Our cleric rushed out to speak with her, and offered guidance, while my character talked with them and reflected on her actions, her desires. Because in her eyes she simply desired order and safety, her ideas however we extreme, believing in a set caste system, with no ability to move up or down, allowing slavery as a means of punishment for crimes as well as punishment for not paying one's debts. She did not see these as evil desires, she saw these as a means of creating an orderly and safe society that is prosperous and strong. She saw no evil in her desires or actions. However, after being told outright that not only were her actions and desires wrong, that they had angered a deity of good by way of the act of someone else sacrificing their life to save hers, well she knew she had to reflect on her life. The next day she asked the cleric to speak with the priests of the temple, to allow my character into the temple, so that she could repent, and seek redemption, but she had one request, she said she would devote her life to good, but that she could not follow Pelor, and asked if she could devote her life to Heironeous, so that she could not only pay her debts with simple devotion, but to go out seeking evil and either bringing them redemption or retribution. Because her reflection made her feel so terrible about what she had done, and what she had planned on doing, she wanted to fight the same evils that had possessed her. The priests communicated and prayed, three days later they came back and said that the gods had agreed, but a ritual must be performed for her atonement. This is how my character became a paladin after being lawful evil.
And now that campaign is over the DM is running another campaign set 300 or so years in the future of that campaign, and while I am not playing the same build, or even type of character, my new character is a descendant of my previous character.
Reached character limit in previous comment, but I wanted to mention a funny story. After my paladin character became lawful good and a paladin, she ended up making a deal with a devil, not as a means of falling back on her evil ways, but because the party had just gotten through a particularly brutal fight and had not had anytime to heal or rest, and the devil had a captive. The party wanted a fight, and they were REALLY gearing up for that fight, but I KNEW we could not win it. But I put my foot down, I demanded that they listen to reason, even if it meant making a deal with the devil, and I told them, it would be ME making the deal, that the burden to bear would be on ME, it is the only way to not only save the captive, but to keep us all alive. they reluctantly agreed. oh and the jokes the players made about a paladin making a deal with a devil, which I guess was kind of making the burden feel even greater, made it easier to roleplay it.
Great vid. I’ve played a paladin of Gond. It’s worth noting that before you play this class look at the rest of the party and maybe ask the group how the paladin could be the balance or voice of reason in the group.
Paladins are fun characters to have as party members because they’re really fun to manipulate. Because they are so lawful, you just have to convince them that what you want them to do is the best way of following through with their code.
They also can be fun to mess with because they always take the high road. In one campaign I’m in, all of the chaotic alignment party members mess with the paladin who stays with the party because he doesn’t trust the rest of the party to be good, and everyone enjoys that dynamic.
I've always hated and fought the idea that a paladin must be lawful. What about the chaotic gods' paladins ? Well, one could argue that only lawful gods need paladins to enforce their view on civilisation. But surely they all have an agenda and view of things that requires (or could benefit of) mortals to be fulfilled. Every time a god could use mortals as weapons against their enemies or enforcers of their will, their should be paladins. Because that's what paladins do, they fight for their god. Not because their god should be the only one in the pantheon (and therefore their view should be the only one), but because their god needs them.
I like to see paladins as pawn in those higher schemes (which could be as petty as mortal ambition), those divine games of checks played on the mortal plane. And their aligment itself serves the goal of their god, even if it's not theirs.
Every god has an agenda and a view of things, but ultimately those are limited. For example, Kelemvor is the achnemesis of all undead and necromancers, but out of that, he doesn't really care about street justice, politics or the fact that the rogue of the party is pickpocketing on the market. Nor should his paladin.
As a paragon, the paladin shouldn't concern themselves with the methods of the mere mortals (not even their party members), day by day, EXCEPT when it comes to the grand scheme that themselves serves. Unless, of course, if their god concerns themselves with day by day demeanor, which is a little bit dull.
This allows (in my games at least) a wide variety of pesonalities amongst paladins of a same deity. Which brings contradiction in places where their gods doesn't concern themselves, therefore good intrgues and roleplay.
I always told my players: Any Lawful alignment for Paladins. LG, LN, LE are all fine... but Paladins operate within the codes of their god.
Paladins should be Lawful UNLESS they serve a Chaotic God.
I've taken a liking to the impression that to espouse yourself to the ideals of another and follow their example or enact their will is to be lawful. If a chaotic god does not follow a code, in order to enact that god's will properly, you must follow the code--or more accurately, their example--of not following a code. In that way, one becomes lawful in their anarchy. If they're doing something because a higher authority demands it, they are following the law of that authority, and, in essence, being lawful. WHAT they're doing, as to whether or not it's good or bad, is irrelevant. Being a Paladin is all about fitting the demands of their personal authoritative figure. To be neutral as a Paladin would be hypocrisy, picking and choosing what parts of a god's will you would follow. To be chaotic as a Paladin would be to rebel against your god's commands. Paladins don't recognize the law of the land as being THEIR law UNLESS their god tells them to do so. They answer to a higher authority, and I think that changes the meaning of what 'lawful' is to them in a way only the Cleric, or, to a far lesser extent, a Druid, could compare. That's just a different way of looking at it, I guess, not that any way is completely right or wrong. A die has many sides.
If you want to play a chaotic servent of a chaotic god... play a trickster cleric. Paladins are bound by OATHS, not necessarily gods.
Panda Cakes that’s a very new conception actually. And even in the PHB it says they draw their power AS MUCH FROM their oaths as from their gods.
There is some great inspiration for interesting paladins here! Thank you.
One thing I like about 5th Edition is that they put less emphasis on the divine aspect of Paladins and more on their devotion to their cause. I play a Paladin character that isn't devoted to a specific deity but is instesd devoted to his mission of protecting the world from the forces of darkness. His order takes anyone with the skill and devotion to take up that cause.
I had a very fun narrative similar to the peacock paladin. This one has the varient knight noble background to include a squire. The best part: the squire does everything. Saves the damsel in distress, fends off the dragon, etc. However the paladin has such high charisma he is able to convince everyone he did it and nobody questions why he keeps needing a new squire(they all die heroicly)
This video help me a lot in determining how I want to present my oath of ancient Giff paladin. Ty
A good example of a Paladin in pop culture (without the powers) is Jon Snow when he was part of the nights watch. He took an oath to an organization and follows the laws and bonds of said organization.
I find that a multi classed Paladin is a guarantee joy to role play. Play it for what it is as there is never a excuse to kill or molest in any sort of way hence their willingness to do combat in all it's diplomacy. Build a palace (that means it has a dungeon too...) & spar, exercise & meditate.
You must gather your party before venturing forth..
As a typical rogue player I also hate the stigma placed upon my characters as "Not trustworthy, steals shit, will betray you because it's funny". I actually tend to play a CG or NG rogue who can be incredibly meek, shy and very cunning. I will steal from bad people and sneak the money into a poor person's hands without them knowing who did this for them. I like to be the "hidden hero" or the unknown face of good fortunes. Never brag about it and leave as many RP encounters as I can feeling wholesome. I am also not above assassinating evil characters when it is necessary. I will usually give the benefit of doubt and try to find out for myself wither somebody is lying. I will use words more than murder. And should I be intimidated, I will bow, say nothing more and try to to walk away. But never think that is the last time you'll see me, if indeed you must be stopped.
Am I any good at RP'ing a "good rogue". Just asking for honest opinion and if I can do anything better.
If a Paladin does break their oath, I just tell them to swap to an Oathbreaker Paladin until they atone. I also have a few homebrew warlocks they a player can use if they even piss off their patron to the point of getting their powers taken away from them.
Paladins, and Rightful Good charakters in general are some of my favorites. But only if they fit in the setting, meaning they should not fit in the setting at all. If in the setting for example, the Kingdom is Rules by a beloved and righteous King and the Paladin would just go about and fight the one or other threat to the good kings rule; then paladins are boring. But if the world is morally grey in grey, ruled by a self serving tyrant where corruption is rampant or a post apocalyptic anarchy where the only law is that of the strong, then a paladin becomes very interesting to me. He is facing seemingly impossible odds, has very little help (most likely only his party) and this leads to some great moral dilemmas for the Rightful Good. If there is not black and white and no right answers, moral and choice becomes difficult.
"Look Sir Osric, an evil doer!"
Paladins are awesome! I love the reluctant pally and helpless hero pally ideas you mentioned. I might role play as a helpless hero pally in the future, that's just very cute and engaging.
Some other ideas I have about pally: 1) could be someone who started as a illiterate fighter, and in medieval time getting into a religious order is one of the cheapest option to get one educated (look at history's great monk/nun scholars), so they became fighter pallies; 2) Just like real life theologians, pallies from different orders or even individual pallies can have different understandings on even the same god(s) and the story potential is just endless from there. Ultimately it could even be settled by how the pally (pallies) performs in the adventure and/or his/her dice throws. (Might not be to some ppl's liking but this is how fate and unknown does to ppl with beliefs in real life so)
IMO a pally can be a conflicted and interesting individual just like anyone else if not more so. To me, having a belief and an standard to live by and build character around/against just makes things so much clearer than classes who doesn't require a define background or with nebulous backgrounds.
One type I think you missed out on is what I like to call the Integrator. Its the paladin from an atypical race (lets say Orc) That serves a god more accepted in a wider community (lets say Pelor here) to help bring stability to their peoples, either because of the community they were raised in being particularly peaceful or just wishing for their people to have a generally better quality of life.
Its a great archetype to work with because it opens up a lot of RP potential for the GM, the player, and the party. The GM gets to construct narratives where the ingrained culture of the player race butts heads with the paladins personal code of conduct. The player gets to help guide that narrative, meanwhile also dealing with stigma due to their background, possibly from paladins of the same order.
The party gets to watch, but also have far more lee way to add their two cents on the topic, either by (from their perspective) rightfully criticizing the paladin's races/gods customs and beliefs or being unsure of weather integration is a good thing for either side. Since this problem isn't a devil that can just be rightfully smashed, a lot of thought (and character development) can be put into it.
It also provides the paladin with a clear objective and one they could easily FAIL at or just never see results in their life time. And I think thats always something important. Paladins are still paladins even when they fail their quests, so long as they keep to the code.
The only major downside to this archetype is that it can be a bit contentious, either due one or more party members treating the issue indelicately (making other players uncomfortable) or causing racial alignment arguments (are orc babies chaotic evil and such). So its definitely one of those archetypes you'd want to make sure your groups comfortable with before getting into.
I'm new to d&d, only familiar with 5e and used Knights Templar and crusaders in movies for reference. Also, to some degree I consider Captain America a modern take on a paladin who is still strictly good, but has so much conflict with social and political issues and just tries his best, never giving up. Long ago, like during the years of the crusades, it was common to view people who didn't follow the same faith as their own as not even people.
The key to playing a party oriented Paladin is self discipline and focus on the bigger picture. Your guidelines, oaths, etc are yours to bear, not the party's.
You and your comrades are together to face down greater evils, to protect Innocents, etc. You shouldn't be focusing on the sins of your fellows. Your God has brought them into your life as a helping hand to achieve greater things.
If a rogue is in the party, for example, and has a penchant for pick pocketing, the Paladin could mention her in prayers for redemption, without condemning her outright. He could persuade her to use her talents to pick pocket the bad guys for keys or info or to disarm them.
Instead of pressuring the party toward inaction, a Paladin could guide them to more proper actions. Support their god given desires and talents, not supress them. 👍
Bless to be blessed and all that jazz.
GoodOldGamer that is good to know!
So the Knights Radiant of Brandon Sanderson's _Stormlight Archive_ are all just 5th edition paladins? Who gain power by swearing oaths, but are restricted from certain paths at the same time?
I might have to rethink the way I perceive paladins, because I really admire some of the characters in that series.
Perhaps I should have realized it earlier: the first main character in those books is literally named Kaladin.
Yep, they're a really good example, though Sanderson's said he also deliberately included radiants who totally defied "magic knight" stereotypes. Lift is a 13 year old latina-looking girl, for example, and Kaladin doesn't really like swords as a weapon in comparison to spears. :P
reluctant tasked Paladin: Why do you want me to protect these Murderes and Sinners!
"My what a fine yet rustic architecture. I must examine it more closely"
Paladin subclasses (with timestamps)
11:35 Traditional Paladin
12:05 The good example
13:13 Desprite Excapie (reluctant paladin)
14:54 Last of their kind
15:52 Helpless hero
16:47 Blackguard(rebel) vrs. Paladin of an evil god
18:18 Peacock
19:20 Hospitalir(passifist)
21:45 Fall from grace story
22:30 Redemtion story
23:01 Tragic hero
a paladin concept i came up with is in conflict with his goddess, yet unknowingly embodies her ideals. the way he views himself is different from how his goddess does, and it's this misunderstanding which shapes his character.
My reason for playing a paladin: Knights are friggin awesome
if you want your paladin to be a adventure, work with the oaths! There are endless possibilities and if push comes to shove; Oathbreaker ark 🤩 you still get to keep the class features! I "homebrew" divine smite to do necrotic damage for some flavour💃
In our live FM radio campaign, our paladin (Cruven Spine Crusher) is a Half Orc who grew up as a Barbarian. His village became infested with Undead, and Cruven escaped with the help of a paladin who sacrificed himself. Cruven became a self taught paladin to honor his ally. It allows for some great role playing with the character's interpretation of paladin rules, and as a paladin with the personality of a barbarian. "Stop being evil or I will rip out your spine and use it as a Handel for tankard" you can listen to the show live on 89.1 fm WPHS or on the Tune In app from 5pm-7pm (eastern time zone). We also have the first episode up on our RUclips Page.
I played a 2nd edition for 7 years lawful stupid was fun. How the rules are enforced and how the party deals with an Idealistic teenager in my case made the game more interesting
I was playing with my friend, and I played a paladin based on Erza Scarlet from Fairy Tail. I thought I was playing in a silly slapstick anime (much like Fairy Tail) and playing Erza the sort of "older sister taking care of childish siblings" as Erza was in the series. Unfortunately, I upset the warlock player. We are all still good friends, but I learned my mistake from that, and always play a paladin as sort of a champion character.
You should see the Paladin in the party i DM for. A single Goblin jumped out of a bush with a tiny knife, and very badly tried to rob them (they were level 6 and they're a Gunslinger Fighter, a Swashbuckler Rogue, and a Paladin). It couldn't have hurt them in it's wildest dream. Pretty much immediately, the Paladin grabbed the Goblin, and drained the life from him (He has an ability Similar to Chill Touch).... He now has 24 Ac (+2 Plate, and a Tower Shield, which gives +4), and, due to a level in Sorcerer, can cast Shield, for 29 Ac. And there's something else that gets him up to 31, but i don't remember what. He's now a Paladin of the Lord of Time (Not quite a god, long story), so doesn't really have any Paladin rules that stop him doing stuff, aside from, don't fuck up time.
Previously responded to this saying Shield shouldn't stack with a Tower Shield, but reading how 5e handles the Shield Spell, it would work. So nevermind, carry on.
My GM for one of my weekly games, refers to our pali as the "unconventional palidan." This guy tends to be, rude and crude, he will say "Gods damn" and he is paraniod enough to detect evil on everyone he meets.
I really like Paladins who are a bit older (for their species at least) and have seen a lot. They´re more wise and less stubborn than those youngsters in chrome armor. They are experienced enough to know that there are more ways than one to stay true to their faith and still solve the issues ahead. In pop culture, one of those Paladins to me is Cpt. Picard (the TNG Picard, not the Picard Picard). He´s a great leader, absolutely stays true to the UFP´s rules and directives, even against the UFP itself but he always takes every point of view into consideration and manages to disagree in a civil way. His method is very philosophical because he knows that the rules he follows and his vows need interpretation to be adapted to different situations.
That´s the point where a good character is important. Someone who doesn´t care could interprete almost any rule in almost infinite ways. But the Paladin embodies the ideals of the one who created the rule and is therefore capable of an interpretation that might deviate from the exact words written but stays true to the idea behind the creation of that rule.
In our real world religions, that´s exactly what happens. To take (roman catholic) christianity for an example: There are many different orders within the catholic church that do things very different but they´re still all roman catholic. Every priest should read the same passages of the Bible to his parish and preach about it. But with three different priests you will probably have three different homilies with three different specific advices for everyday life, yet the idea behind it and the goal of the advices are the same for all three of them. Religions in a fantasy setting do not have two millenia of tradition and history, but as a Paladin player you should invest a bit more onto the complexity of your religion than just creating like five rules that you will follow in the most literal way possible. Create a bit of a theological dispute in your order and suddenly you have at least two possible ways of interpretation of these rules.
My favorite character to run ever was a paladin.
I did not run the stereotypical "Lawful Stupid"
I chose a background and deity that precluded use of metal armor among other alterations to the norms.
At the end of the mission where the paladin earned the EXP for 8th level a high level cleric of a different deity tried to award a set of spectacular plate armor, which I refused: "I am sorry but my vows prevent me from making use of or even possessing such items" so the DM had the priests commission a special set of white leather. (then I moved and never found out what stats he was going to give the armor)
I have a Paladin/hexblade warlock character who failed his first quest and feels he’s lost his gods favor, he’s now desperately seeking to regain his gods favor and in so doing has been tricked by something pretending to be his god so potentially evil things are justified as “the greater good.”
right now I'm playing a paladin who was born into power and didn't realize it, the "god" that his people worship is the sun itself (Amaunator if you want a specific god, but they don't directly follow nor pay attention to this god) so his power comes from the divine power of nature itself. He's not a traditional sort of paladin that tries to impose goodness on others, but is driven by trying to understand where evil arises and trying to undermine it through understanding and embracing those who would otherwise fall to its devices.
His story is that he was born with these powers and he should harness them to protect the ones he loves... His driving force is that his people for so long were seen as brutish and dangerous and susceptible to demonic influence (minotaurs), and he wants to prove to himself and to others that they don't have to be like that anymore... It's been very fun.
When you were talking about the "last of their kind" type of paladin the first character that came to mind, In terms of personality at least was Superman (specifically the DCAU version from the late 90s early 2000s). I mean, I know his powers aren't granted like a paladin, but the drive do be an example, and the rules he feels he should follow and all that seem to fit the archetype, if not the specifics of the class.